More on Afghanistan.

.
.
.
.

Two Cents About COIN

by Ryan McCarl, at Antiwar.com

The war in Afghanistan, according to Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s recent assessment, is "a situation that defies simple solutions or quick fixes. Success demands a comprehensive counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign." McChrystal and other American leaders calling for a "surge" of additional U.S. troops into Afghanistan to mirror the alleged success of the "surge" in Iraq are voicing their belief that the doctrinal framework for the original surge – COIN, or manpower-intensive counterinsurgency warfare – is a widely-applicable tool in asymmetric warfare that the U.S. ought to employ in Afghanistan.

(Actually General, without over embellishing your position and self importance with regard to the war in Afghanistan, the solutions to the Afghan problem are quite simple.

The Afghans want peace, tranquility and a semblance of a government/governance------if we could just look at the "problem" from that perspective for a short while, after 30 years of war and invasion by RUSSIA, installing their puppet the Communists of Babrak Kamal/Nazibullah, Parcham fraction of 1980--1989{1.5 million dead, 5 million refugees},

The Afghan civil war.....many factions 1989---1996 {100,000 dead} Russian, Indian, Iranian, and Pakistani interference.

PAKISTAN, installing the Taliban puppets, with American backing. Mad regionalised SUNNI Islam faction. 1994--2001{100,000 dead }

....and the current bunch led by America 2001---2009. Wholly corrupt, American SOB/UNICOL faction {100.000 dead since 2001}

....a reasonable Afghan central government in Kabul would under cut the position of the Taliban, and allow a functioning Central Afghan government to emerge, running the whole of the country, and at the same time be strong enough to withstand external interference, especially against Pakistan. This is what Afghanistan needs.

What the Afghans, and the world have had however is an CLEAR disconnect between public rhetoric by especially American public officials in the military, and the reality of the actual situation in Afghanistan.

The Taliban militia of 40,000--50,000 in 2001 were easily defeated by American air power, special forces and the Northern Alliance, with little or no cost to lives.

If you used about a few thousand special forces against 40,000--50,000 Taliban, and defeated them in about a couple of weeks, why then do you need a future projected force of 500,000 Afghan and coalition forces to defeat a much smaller number of Taliban, fighting over a few years presumably, starting from now, after 8 years of occupation and consolidation in Afghanistan?

Whats/where is the rationale and logic of this?

"al-Qaeda" which is an intelligence hoax hollogram of Western/Israeli intelligence, no longer exists in Afghanistan, and admitted as such by the latest intelligence assessments of 2009.

Osama has been dead since December 2001. Osama's codename was "Tim Osman", and he had extensive liaison with his Western intelligence handlers right until his death in 2001. This suggests he was a puppet of Western intelligence. His real organization consisted of no more than a dozen Arab friends and fellow travelers.

NOT 5,000 men from such diverse backgrounds as Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Chechnya, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and Indonesia.............He would have had to have been a truly remarkable leader to have wielded and led such a desperate, diverse, variegated type of nationals under his sole leadership. As suggested/hinted he clearly did not lead such a group...at best he may have liaised with some of them for HIS WESTERN/ISRAELI intelligence handlers knowingly....each of the nationals in the Afghan foreign jehadi movement had their own leadership, or even not. They did not recognize him as their leader; tortured confessions not withstanding. "al-Qaeda" does not exist, never did.

They did not attack/undertake 9/11 on American soil. Their sole objective if there ever was one was to fight infedals on Muslim soil using conventional weapons in irregular warfare....in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and later Kosovo, with guidance and encouragement from America/Israel as the hidden hand to create an "al-Qaeda" hoax hologram.

The events of 9/11 in America were carried out by remote controlled planes (twin towers case.....remember space orbs by NASA are sent to Mars and back by remote control)..........pre-existing demolition teams in place a few weeks before 9/11 in Trade Center Buildings 1,2 and 7. Finally in the case of the Pentagon attack it could have been either a cruise missiles or a Predator.

These types of highly specialized technology, their theft from the American secret arsenal, their expert handling and final use,the mythical non-existent hologram "al-Qaeda" could not have had access to ALL at the same time, so coincidentally, hitting their targets with such precision..........Arabs are not superhuman, Saudi twenty something youths who are dysfunctional, unremarkable, taking dope, binging on alcohol prior to that sad event could not have had access to such technology, or the capacity to carry out such profound expert action in tandem, without fail, on their very first attempt, on a foreign soil in New York, and its hinterland.

This was the work of Israel and their agents in America, within American security. Their agents in America had the capacity and security clearance to steal these highly specialised equipment, and use them as professional experts who knew how to use them, as experts. Not 20 something Ay-Rabs.

Means, motive, opportunity---strategic objectives:

Summary real intended outcome:

1) 9/11 was primarily a criminal financial act by elements in the USA and Israel, a high percentage of those who were really involved being Jewish.

2) From an Israeli perspective 9/11 would help Israel get closer to America, 'Were in this together'. "Our war is your war"

3) 9/11 would enable the Israel first Bush administration launch a Crusade for Israel and smash countries deemed to be a threat to Israel.-------7 countries in 5 years was the talk in late 2001, at the Pentagon.

4) 9/11 would allow the Israelis to more openly pursue their agenda's without the critical Western media being too scrutinizing. Dealing with the Palestinians more harshly, as they have done so since 2001, and then attacking Lebanon and there after Syria---'A Clean Break' document 1996.

5) 9/11 would allow the Jew greater control over America, by creating a security police state, with them setting and deciding the agenda's in America.

Some perspectives on 9/11

The 5,000 international Jihadi fighters who were falsely identified as "al-Qaeda" in Afghanistan in 2001 are NOW mostly dead, or have returned to their native countries via Iran, or Pakistan/Maldives or Pakistan/Oman.

There are about 10,000 regular "Taliban" fighters fighting in the East and South East of the country, backed by the Pakistan military.......BUT this is not because these people are waging a global jihad, where upon when they finish their task in Afghanistan they are going to head towards America. Hardly; the leadership and the rank and file of the Taliban have local objectives. Indeed many of the rank and file of the Taliban are not true Taliban, but have joined because of some bad experience with the occupation forces, or grievances against the UNICOL puppet, and its security forces....eg Afghan police enter and occupy a village and rape the boys in that area, which enrages the locals into joining the Taliban....a local warlord extorts a % of the annual harvest from local Afghans which makes their lives unbearable, so they join the Taliban to fight the warlord who is allied to the occupation force.........NOTHING TO DO WITH HARMING THE WEST/ATTACKING THE WEST.

The Taliban in turn is CONTROLLED/SUPPLIED by the Pakistani military, period.

__________________________________

Once this true scenario is understood, then American politicians must decide whether they wish to continue fighting an unnecessary war, or they begin to put in place a system that will preserve a realistic civilian Kabul government, which can stand alone and fight and defeat the Taliban eventually.

There are various alternative "real reason" arguments put forward as to why America is in Afghanistan:

1) To protect the pipelines from Central Asia carrying gas and oil----well it doesn't make sense to have a state of the art military machine MERELY guarding pipelines, especially where each of these boys cost $750,000---$1,000,000 each year to maintain in Afghanistan. Much more practical to have the locals, with the added incentives do the protecting.

Now I appreciate many people have subsequently questioned the "intelligence" of the Bush administration, in the full holistic sense of the word......but the passage of time and experience should allow us to adjust how strategies are pursued, and not get into policy ruts. You know Iraq, we invade and own Iraqi oil, the second largest reserves on earth......"Its mine, mine, mine, mine mine.....you hear me...no one else can have it, no one, its mine, mine....free, free, free".....under International law, this is illegal appropriation. An occupying power has certain legal obligations, lest the legal experts at the State Department forget, and one of them is that states clearly that are occupying powers, beyond reasonable requests for reparations, cannot just grab the local resources and do with them as they wish.....like in the good old days of European colonialism........But that was the presumption of the Bush administration, it seemed as they legislated away Iraqi oil rights. So not a stretch to see the rational of the Bush administration over the pipelines/and American military protection for them in the context of Afghanistan as the real reason for the invasion of that country.

2. $50--80 billion annual opium/narcotics profit from Afghanistan:----again as with the above argument, the American military does not have to be in Afghanistan to secure the profits for the criminal few in the Pentagon and their civilian contacts. The main issue for the international narcotics business is who controls the international routes and end sale business in the profitable European, North American and Russian markets. Maybe the narcotics profits from South America is about $200 billion enabled by the American military/security into North America.....and growing every year, but as with the case of South America, and so thus with AFGHANISTAN, American security personnel do not have to be in place there to secure the business for the criminal elites of America/UK.....Small military missions under the guise of fighting left-wing guerrillas in South America and the narcotics trade in those countries is enough. "Its mine, Its mine...its mine...I'm rich, very rich.....soo rich....the eyes light up and flash......pent houses in Manhattan, ........."

Top decisionmakers in the U.S. military, including Gen. McChrystal and Gen. David Petraeus, continue to express their faith in the doctrine, which they played major roles in creating. Prominent Republicans in Congress, who almost unanimously support sending more troops to Afghanistan, have endorsed a nation-building strategy that relies heavily on COIN over a counterterrorism strategy that focuses on targeting al-Qaeda and other militants from a distance. Several key figures in the Obama administration also appear to favor that approach.

(Well a counter terrorism campaign is a waste of time if everybody has concluded that "al-Qaeda" is not present in Afghanistan. So from the the Pentagon's point of view a different rational and strategies have to be put forward and that seems to be COIN. There are military men who want their moment of glory....their chance to be the next MacArthur, Patton, and Grant, and be recognised for it......just amazing how General MacCrystal went about "selling" his war....and so it will be difficult to convince them that there is no real enemy to fight in Afghanistan; the politicians ultimately must decide whether America continues with this military charade and fantasy. 9/11 was a sad charade, but must it continue for ever?)

It may be true that, as military expert Stephen Biddle said in recent Congressional testimony, "the U.S. is an unusually experienced counterinsurgent force today," and "the new Army/Marine counterinsurgency doctrine…is the product of a nearly unprecedented degree of internal debate, external vetting, historical analysis, and direct recent combat experience."

(Has America won a real counter-insurgency campaign yet?......Can you be so blatantly in your face brutal to the Afghans re: Karzai, and tolerate his ilk, and their deeds....and think we can "win" in Afghanistan. The Basic premise and pattern of behavior is wrong........if you spend 98% of ALL your expenditure on the military in Afghanistan, can you win a counter-insurgency? To be sure dear fat, nasty friends.....Pashtun dominated, Eastern/South Western Afghanistan is difficult to "reach out" to but what about the rest of the country....the Central Hazara, the Persian East around Herat, The Uzbek North, or the Tajik North East?..........How many fucking schools have you built with our fucking Jew NARCO $.....How many hospitals, roads, bridges, houses, factories, offices,...............farms)

But these very factors that have encouraged so many highly capable U.S. leaders to sign on to "COIN" should cause observers to be wary of the doctrine and the currency it increasingly enjoys in the American political debate. After all, the more enthusiastic we are about the potential of COIN warfare, the more blind we will be to its costs, which are enormous.

(You might just fail, all the Iranians, Chinese or Pakistanis have to do is start supplying light SAMS to the Taliban.......they have not had these yet)

We can and must think about contemporary problems – such as what strategy the U.S. should pursue in Afghanistan – through the lenses of relevant theories and historical analogies. But it is foolish to think within the box of a single analogy, such as the Iraq "surge," or a single theory, such as the idea that we can succeed at counterinsurgency and nation-building by deploying generous numbers of ground troops and focusing on winning the "hearts and minds" of local communities.

(Very nice academic semantics about the art of war....whilst ordinary Afghan's, and yes Americans are suffering...."Through the lenses of relevant theory....." like he was lecturing at West Point or something)

Our need to make quick decisions and cope with a complex world creates a powerful incentive for us to create "rules of thumb," default beliefs, habits, choices, or courses of action that we adopt almost without thinking. And yet when those in the halls of power make major decisions on the basis of such "rules of thumb," the results can sometimes be disastrous. It behooves political observers to be aware of new decision-making habits, and the spread of some new piece of "conventional wisdom," in their leaders.

It is important to remember that military leaders have a major incentive to endorse a COIN approach in Afghanistan. According to General Petraeus and other experts, most successful COIN operations require very high numbers of U.S. troops on the ground – numbers that may be politically and logistically impossible for the Obama administration to accept.

(Once they get their quota, they'll ask for more, and more...and when they finally don't, they'll blame the politicians)

Because the number of troops that can be reasonably demanded for a COIN operation is essentially limitless, mission failure can be blamed on the executive branch for not sending enough troops rather than on military leaders, the combat environment, or the COIN playbook itself. As Gen. McChrystal wrote in his assessment: "Success is not ensured by additional forces alone, but continued under resourcing will likely cause failure."

Organizational psychology and the logic of bureaucracies provide more clues into the wave of COIN-fever that appears to have struck so many of our political and military leaders. Simply put, it was neither easy nor cheap for the military to develop COIN doctrine as we attempted to salvage the war in Iraq in recent years, and now COIN feels like hard-won wisdom that we should put to the test in another theater of war. It’s a classic case of sunk costs: it is felt that we paid too much for COIN to abandon it now.

Policymakers’ belief in the power of COIN may encourage them to see military solutions where none exist. If the U.S. opts to send tens of thousands of additional ground troops to Afghanistan in order to pursue a comprehensive COIN strategy, it will be taking on a great deal of risk and incurring substantial additional costs in pursuit of a highly uncertain outcome.

Scott Ritter on Afghanistan.

.
.
.
.

McChrystal Doesn’t Get It—Does Obama?

By Scott Ritter at Truthdig.com
.

There is a curious phenomenon taking place in the American media at the moment: the lionization of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the American military commander in Afghanistan. Although he has taken a few lumps for playing politics with the White House, McChrystal has generally been sold to the American public as a “Zen warrior,” a counterinsurgency genius who, if simply left to his own devices, will be able to radically transform the ongoing debacle that is Afghanistan into a noble victory that will rank as one of the greatest political and military triumphs of modern history. McChrystal’s resume and persona (a former commander of America’s special operations forces, a tireless athlete and a scholar) have been breathlessly celebrated in several interviews and articles. Reporters depict him as an ascetic soldier who spouts words of wisdom to rival Confucius, Jesus and Muhammad.

(Yes there is NOTHING to win against in Afghanistan. America "won" in 2001, when "al-Qaeda" was defeated there, and Osama was allowed to escape from Tora Bora. Osama has since died probably in December 2001, because since that time he has not given direct media interviews to any journalists of note, which he had a habit of doing prior to that time.

The 40,000--50,000 Taliban militia assisted/guided by the Pakistani military with Washington's approval prior to 2001, is at best now about 10,000 regular fighters who want their country back from foreign rule......nothing inherently wrong in that under International Law. And the 5,000 foreign fighters in Afghanistan at that time from various Arab countries, Chechnya, Uzbekistan and other places often referred to as "al-Qaeda", are mostly dead, gone home or not worth bothering about-----100 in Afghanistan, and about 350 Pakistan......The Pakistani security people, who sold 650 innocents to the Americans under GWOT like to over inflate this figure, and continue with the lie that Osama is alive, but this is not the case. Pakistani assessments of foreign fighters figures must be taken with a pinch of salt.

In the current Waziristan campaign they claimed that upwards of 1500 "al-Qaeda' affiliated fighters were massed waiting in that region. Hopefully perhaps the Pakistani military will produce some of them.)

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff sent Gen. McChrystal to “fix” the war in Afghanistan in the way that his boss, that earlier military prophet Gen. David Petraeus, “fixed” Iraq. Whether by accident or design, McChrystal’s mission became a cause célèbre of sorts for an American media starved for good news, even if entirely fabricated, coming out of Afghanistan. One must remember that the general has accomplished little of note during his short tenure to date as the military commander in Afghanistan. His entire reputation is built around the potential to turn things around in Afghanistan. And to do this, McChrystal has said he needs time, and 40,000-plus additional American troops. There are currently around 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. McChrystal’s request would raise that number to around 110,000 troops – the same number as the Soviets had deployed in Afghanistan at the height of their failed military adventure some 20 years ago.

McChrystal, or more accurately, his staff, has authored a not-so-secret report that outlines the reasoning behind this massive increase in American military involvement in Afghanistan. Rightly noting that the American-led effort is currently failing, McChrystal argues that only a massive infusion of U.S. troops, and a corresponding “surge” of American civilians, can achieve the stability necessary to transform Afghanistan from the failed state it is today. A viable nation capable of self-government, the new Afghanistan could maintain internal security so that terrorist organizations like al-Qaida will not be able to take root, flourish and once again threaten American security from the sanctuary of a lawless land. This concept certainly looks good on paper and plays well in the editorial section. And why shouldn’t it? It touches on all the romantic notions of America as liberator and defender of the oppressed. The problem is that the assumptions made in the McChrystal report are so far removed from reality as to be ludicrous.

(I'll bet the moon that America can never stabilize Afghanistan, and turn it into a functioning democracy.....because the real players in the Afghan play ground have other intentions, not withstanding the good people amongst the occupation forces......narcotics etc....if narcotics is the main reason you are there how can you have a normal functioning democracy in that country? Obviously you must make do with amoral crooks fronting your operations.............the type that sell their grandmother for a $......and there in lies the BASIC failure of the Afghan misadventure.

By the way I happen to think democracy is an universal gift that can work with ANY types of people......with some people it takes longer to take root, but democracy CAN work in any given society. If however you knowingly front crooked puppets, then democracy has a little struggle to take hold in that society....and then what you do is blame the people, because that's the easiest cop out, short of looking at your own actions and failures..."oh these people are primitive"..."We can't transfer our cultural values on to them"....."They have their own way of doing things")

McChrystal operates under the illusion that American military power can provide a shield from behind which Afghanistan can remake itself into a viable modern society. He has deluded himself and others into believing that the people of Afghanistan want to be part of such a grand social experiment, and furthermore that they will tolerate the United States being in charge. The reality of Afghan history, culture and society argue otherwise. The Taliban, once a defeated entity in the months following the initial American military incursion into Afghanistan, are resurgent and growing stronger every day. The principle source of the Taliban’s popularity is the resentment of the Afghan people toward the American occupation and the corrupt proxy government of Hamid Karzai. There is nothing an additional 40,000 American troops will be able to do to change that basic equation. The Soviets tried and failed. They deployed 110,000 troops, operating on less restrictive lines of communication and logistical supply than the United States. They built an Afghan army of some 45,000 troops. They operated without the constraints of American rules of engagement. They slaughtered around a million Afghans. And they lost, for the simple reason that the people of Afghanistan did not want them, or their Afghan proxies.

Some pundits and observers make note of the fact that the Afghan people were able to prevail over the Soviets only because of billions of dollars of U.S. aid, which together with similar funding from Saudi Arabia and the logistical support of Pakistan, allowed the Afghan resistance to coalesce, grow and ultimately defeat the Soviets and their Afghan allies. They note that there is no equivalent source of empowerment for the Taliban in Afghanistan today. But they are wrong. The Taliban receive millions of dollars from sympathetic sources in the Middle East, in particular from Saudi Arabia, and they operate not only from within Afghanistan, but also out of safe havens inside Pakistan.

Indeed, one of the unique aspects of the Afghan conflict is the degree to which it has expanded into Pakistan, making any military solution in one theater contingent on military victory in the other. But the reality is that the more one employs military force in either Afghanistan or Pakistan, the more one strengthens the cause and resources of the Islamic insurgents in both places. Pashtunistan, once a fanciful notion built around the concept of a united Pashtun people (the population in eastern Afghanistan and western Pakistan are primarily drawn from Pashtun tribes), has become a de facto reality. The decision by the British in 1897 to separate the Pashtun through the artificial device of the so-called Durand Line (which today constitutes the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan) has been exposed today as a futile effort to undermine tribal links. No amount of military force can reverse this.

Thus the solution itself becomes the problem, thereby creating a never-ending circular conflict which has the United States expending more and more resources to resolve a situation that has nothing to do with the reality on the ground in Afghanistan, and everything to do with crafting a politically viable salve for what is in essence a massive self-inflicted wound. It is the proverbial dog chasing after its own tail, a frustrating experience made even more so by the fact that any massive commitment of troops brings with it the fatal attachment of national pride, individual hubris and, worst of all, the scourge of domestic American politics, so that by the time this dog bites its tail, it will be so blinded by artificialities that rather than recognize its mistake, it will instead proceed to consume itself. In the case of Afghanistan, our consumption will be measured in the lives of American servicemen and women, national treasure, national honor, and, of course the lives of countless Afghan dead and wounded.

The manner in which McChrystal has peddled his plan for Afghanistan to the American media, and to Congress, may be politically savvy. It is certainly insubordinate. The decision to employ American military power is the sole prerogative of the American president. A general may offer advice, but any effort to engage the machinery of politics to pressure a sitting president defies the basic constitutional tenet of civilian control over the military. President Obama, once a constitutional law professor, should know as much, and would do well to severely reprimand McChrystal for his actions. Or better yet, Obama should fire McChrystal and replace him with someone who respects the rule of law and the chain of command.

Obama may have won the Nobel Peace Prize, but if he allows himself to be bullied into supporting McChrystal’s foray into Afghanistan, he will reveal himself as the worst kind of warmonger. True, he didn’t invent the Afghan quagmire. That honor resides with George W. Bush, who also is to blame for the American fiasco in Iraq. But history will be surprisingly gentle toward America’s 43rd president. Bush will share the blame for his calamitous military decisions with the mistaken policies of previous administrations, a compliant Congress, headstrong advisers, servile intelligence agencies and, of course, the shock of the events of Sept. 11, 2001. Bush will be seen more as a useful idiot than a ruthless ideologue. Obama, with his obvious intelligence, soaring rhetorical skills and Nobel credentials, does not readily fit such a characterization. If he decides to reinforce failure in Afghanistan by dispatching tens of thousands more American troops to that disaster, America’s 44th president will cement himself as a grand fraud, a hawk hiding in dove feathers. Given his potential for doing good, one clearly would not want such a scenario to play out.

The president’s lack of military experience screams out when he calls America’s involvement in Afghanistan a “good war.” He would have been better off trying to make the case for a justifiable war, or even a necessary war, but to label a process that brings about the death and injury of thousands as “good” makes me wonder about Obama’s fitness to be commander in chief. His seeming inexperience on national security affairs and foreign policy leave him vulnerable to domestic political pressures that emanate from these arenas. The president does possess the vision to see a world in which America stands side by side with other nations as an equal, operating with a shared notion of due process and respect for the rule of law, but that doesn’t square with any decision to deploy more troops to Afghanistan. Expanding the war in Afghanistan will lend credence to the central worry about Obama: that, at the end of the day, this man of vision might in fact be little more than an Illinois politician who is willing to barter away American life, treasure and good will for political gain on the domestic front. And, in doing so, it will undermine his noble vision of an America “resetting” its relationship with the world following eight years of unilateralist militarism.

A true leader, one with substance and gravitas, would be able to stand up to the combined pressure of the military, the right-wing of Congress and the American media. He would draw the correct conclusions from the lessons of history, which prove again and again that Afghanistan is not a problem that can be solved by foreign military intervention. The fact that Obama might be compelled to alleviate the political pressure he is receiving from these sources by condemning America to another decade of death and destruction in Afghanistan and, most probably, Pakistan, reinforces any perception of his weakness as a national leader.

Afghanistan has, over the centuries, earned its reputation as the graveyard of empires. Just ask the Greeks, Mongols, British and Russians. If Barack Obama ultimately agrees to dispatch more American troops to Afghanistan, he will ensure not only that America will add its name to the list of those who have failed in their effort to conquer the unconquerable, but also that his name will join the ranks of those leaders throughout history who succumbed to the temptations of hubris when given the choice between war and peace. The Nobel committee will have failed in its gambit to motivate America’s 44th president to embrace the mantle of peacemaker, and the American people will be left to sort through the detritus of war brought on by yet another failed president.

Of course, the future is not yet set in stone. The decision to dispatch more troops, although the subject of much rumor and speculation, has been delayed pending the final dispensation of Afghanistan’s controversial presidential election. One can only hope that President Obama will take advantage of this timely “pause” to reconsider his options regarding Afghanistan beyond the single-minded rush to reinforce a current policy the U.S. military has acknowledged as having gone nowhere in the eight years of American military engagement.

Vice President Joe Biden had earlier proposed a policy course that would have de-emphasized military engagement with the Taliban, focusing instead on rooting out the forces of al-Qaida still operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan. President Obama was reportedly not sold on Biden’s thinking when it was first presented last March. Perhaps now, upon reflection, the president will do the right thing and reduce America’s military involvement in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, either along the lines proposed by Vice President Biden, or through some other mechanism. There is no military solution to the problems facing the United States today in Afghanistan, and thus the correct course of action is to de-militarize the situation by reducing, not expanding, America’s military presence.

Clearly Gen. Stanley McChrystal is not the man for this task. He should be replaced by someone within the ranks of the U.S. military who shares Obama’s vision of peace, and with it the need to redefine the mission in South Asia. The legitimate requirements of American national security will not be satisfied by any massive military commitment to the region. Hopefully, President Obama will recognize this fact and get out. That would be a sign of greatness, and present to the American people and the rest of the world a leader worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.

_________________________________

Scott Ritter is a former Marine intelligence officer, chief U.N. weapons inspector and the author of numerous books on foreign policy.

The $1,500 billion military industrial complex of the USA.

.
.
.
.
.

Bleep NATO

By Jeff Huber at antiwar.com

Tom Shanker of the New York Times tells us that NATO defense ministers have given their "broad endorsement" to Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s plan to escalate the Afghanistan war into a full-Monty counter insurgency effort. NATO defense ministers love Afghanistan; it justifies their phony-baloney jobs.

(generally NATO nations, bar America/UK, are reluctant to get involved in pseudo-colonial wars, which serve no real obvious purpose for their countries; Wars which have no definitive objectives but quite the contrary seem to be open ended fair weather, ever changing explanations for why they must be in Afghanistan; Military operations which are well beyond the borders of NATO countries and their traditional operational mandate. Such disparities of issues gives NATO nations ample opportunity to reflect on the long term necessity of NATO, after the demise of the Soviet Union. The wishes of the Jewish one world government concept not withstanding-----instituted around the Protocols, which were written in the 19th century by the Rothschilds of England with agreement with all the rest of them, and the need to build security structures around that single desire and ideology for the future )

Like much of the U.S. military, NATO became irrelevant when the Cold War ended. Pseudo-counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen, who has been an adviser to David Petraeus and McChrystal (He is not American, but useful if you are thinking of building a global military force, which follows the Jewish master plan, which is not constrained by irritating debating and voting procedures of the UN. Yet yet another Celtic person.......This sounds like another Jewish instituted, albeit subliminal, race war.....Celts verses who though?) says one of the major reasons to press for a larger effort in Afghanistan is to preserve the NATO alliance. He doesn’t think counterterrorism is a particularly important reason to be in Afghanistan. (It’s not at the top of his list.)

(From a Jewish one world master plan perspectives Kilcullen's logic is perfectly reasonable....but obviously not for "ordinary" Americans out of the Jewish master plan loop......you use unnecessary wars to forge future global forces which will without question follow your dictates..."Starship troopers" (1997)..mocking anti-American satire from an European director, which unfortunately has become the reality with the USA, UK.......and even European countries, including the movie directors country Netherlands.....the insects in the desert are the rag heads who are faceless, dehumanised things which must be destroyed.....invaded....based on the thinest and wildest excuses straight from the colonial era.........in the movies case asteriods being sent by the primitive insects at Earth.

Afghanistan is profitable for them obviously, since it generates narcotics profits in the region of $50--80 billion annually.................The Afghans harvest it and they get about 5%....Hamid Karzai's brother: The American and British military protect and transport it. The proceeds are laundered in NY and London high street banks, and finally of course a select few in the Pentagon and in the UK profit from it.)

To escalate our woebegone war in Afghanistan because NATO wants us to would be the dumbest foreign policy choice our country has ever made, and we’ve made a lot of dumb foreign policy choices. (My favorite example is becoming involved in World War I. We should have stiff-armed that fandango, let the Europeans bleed themselves ashen, then offered to feed them on strict conditions. Alas.)

("Dumb choices" is the wrong adjective because it suggests the people in power who make such choices were MERELY misguided, but for their choices.......I would argue otherwise........the people who make the "dumb choices" for America are actually not that "dumb", but have priorities which shall we say do not run parallel with the general true interests of the USA overall.......they are highly intelligent, articulate, aggressive, amoral criminals who have over time amassed power and privilege in American society.

..........This means that these criminals can both fund the Soviet Union covertly, giving it a decisive push in its creation in 1918, AND at the same time run a $6 trillion Cold War HOAX, involving many unnecessary proxy wars around the world in Korea, Vietnam, Cuban missile crisis, fighting their created monsters......etc etc, over 40 years. Saddam's Iraq, and Taliban/"al-Qaeda" Afghanistan thus, along this line of facts isn't a new phenomenon.



Getting perfectly intelligent capable gentiles all heated up, doing the woggy sun dance around their set of fake agenda's, without the hindsight of being able to see their overall covert picture.

Funding the Nazis into power; providing the materials and finance for German rearmament, and then building the coalition to defeat the Nazis...after 60 million people have perished.

These games are not new)

The world needs NATO like fish need hammers. I had fun galore getting pie-faced with Brits and Germans and other Europeans at after-hour planning sessions for international combat exercises, but fun galore isn’t a reason to escalate our war in Afghanistan. How much more blood and treasure do we need to pour into one of the bleakest parts of the world in order to throw a party for our European pals?

(No America does not need to be in Afghanistan. Osama is dead...his fictional non-existential organization constitutes no clear threat to the USA, and the Taliban can be managed via the Pakistan military comprehensively if America is serious about it)

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has been consistently critical of NATO involvement in Afghanistan to date. Gates has danced on a lot of laps in regard to this subject. He always wants more help from NATO, but he doesn’t like the help he gets. NATO doesn’t know how to do counterinsurgency, Gates has complained. But now, they’re all lovey-dovey about counterinsurgency, now that they realize how manpower-intensive it is and how much throwing in with the McChrystal plan will defend their defense budgets. NATO, like much of the U.S. military, hasn’t had a reason to exist since the Berlin Wall came tumbling down in the early 1990s.

(Iran/Contra Gates is merely doing his duty for his real masters/constituency.....ensuring the Afghan narcotics flows into Europe and Russia, and his friends in the Pentagon, and UK profit from their sale.......$50---80 billion annually...presumably that is why he has been left at this vital post as a Republican appointee, and a crony of the Bush clan out of Texas. If Obama was really serious about curtailing this $1,500 billion gravy train which is the MIC, then he would have appointed a close trusted Democrat in that vital position, and not a left over from the Bush era.....this merely signals continuity, surely)

Ludicrous Dick Cheney has asserted that the Obama administration’s "dithering" on what course to take in Afghanistan will "embolden" the evil ones. Everybody who can find the ends of their noses knows Dick Cheney is a dithering idiot; he’s never been right about anything. The only entity that has been emboldened is the Western alliance’s military industrial complex, led by the Pentagon, who are fighting not for the safety of their countries but for their own existence.

(There we go again, calling "Darth Vader" Dick a dithering idiot.......the guy is a billionaire who has made is money through the American MIC, serving in several administrations, gradually shifting to the loony right as he progressed with age and senility. Dick makes money through war,......and did not become a billionaire from humble beginnings by being a dithering idiot full stop...a former lineman of humble background, who is now a billionaire....for him war is profitable.....obviously he is going to "fight" for America to continue on-going unnecessary wars, using what ever cock and bull snarling, grimace, hardball, nose expanding excuses he can think of ....but certainly not a dithering idiot---this gives a misleading analysis; as if he is somehow a cuddly man, who is inherently honest, forever doing the right and decent thing for America, selflessly at his post working away for America, but somehow quite not up to the job----NOT. He is a businessman first and foremost, making money through war and conflict....merchant of death, looking after number one)

The Pentagon’s long-war grand strategy is good for everybody’s war business. The Afghanistan conflict is particularly suitable; it’s the kind of Orwellian war that can go on forever without getting too obnoxious, and in the case of America, it’s one that the Democrats, not the Republicans, have ownership of. Or at least it can be sold that way.

(Do you really need 500,000 Afghan and coalition forces to fight 10,000 poorly armed Taliban militia?---Obviously not.......to really fight the Taliban you squeeze the Pakistan military first and foremost, the Taliban's main backers, and then arm the Afghan's who don't like the Taliban SINCERELY, and who do not have a criminal background, not tongue in cheek...and I am so JEW clever kind of way, and that is it....without the backing of the Pakistan military the Taliban cannot exist. Of course here we must talk about intentions...what are the true intentions.......of the occupation forces? Let us not leave out the $50--80 billion annual narcotics profits. Maybe this later fact can be circulated to the NATO members beyond the USA/UK........a pimp force for international narco traders)



Shanker writes, "Mr. Gates, who has kept his views about additional troops close to his vest and has discouraged his commanders from lobbying too publicly for their positions, declined to be drawn out on this assessment." That’s the biggest lie out of the New York Times since the Nigergate hoax that led to the invasion of Iraq. The media campaign the Pentagon has been waging to pressure Obama into acceding to McChrystal’s demands amounts to a soft coup.

(Obama has yet to make his decision. Let us hope that he is not fixed by the MIC too quickly and early in this new administration, which then fetters his policy options for the future, in Afghanistan, and domestically; both very linked you see.......guns or butter? You can't have both. For Obama to realize his health care initiatives, education, social welfare programs he has to cut the real security budget of $1.5 trillion eventually...he can't have both)

Candidate Obama stuck his nose in the wringer when he deflected criticism of his vote against the surge in Iraq by saying it took vital assets away from the effort in Afghanistan, the "war of necessity." That may turn out to be the tragic flaw of his presidency. The war in Afghanistan is no more necessary than most other American wars have been. None of the 9/11 attackers came from Afghanistan, and al-Qaeda isn’t there any more. As best we can tell, what remains of al-Qaeda is in Pakistan, and very little remains of it.

(No they came from Israel and America. al-Qaeda does not exist. Doubtful if any of the 19 Arabs "hijackers" were actually involved.....remote controlled planes...the list of 19 hijackers was created/provided by Indian intelligence and forwarded to the FBI (as per Jewish desire for one world government, where international security/intelligence "cooperate" with each other around the Jewish master plan) never mind that Indian intelligence were dubiously unqualified to identify who the real perpetrators of 9/11 were IN AMERICA.........far, far away in India....and that mysteriously some of the said identified hijackers are still alive in their countries.......GWOT reduced to its simple form is a Jewish war, instituted to enforce their agenda around the world, and for one world government. Thus when you have such an ambition security institutions play an important role obviously, because you need the sheep to follow your orders, whether they like it or not....as it was with Gestapo Nazi Germany...and the NKVD Soviet Union.)

America and its NATO allies account for about 90 percent of global arms sales. We have no competitors.

(Global arms sales are here to stay no matter what. The main issue rather is that rich powerful nations should not commit to war against Third World nations on dubious false grounds, and then attempt to continue with these military adventures with even more ever shifting dubious explanations, thereafter, through the Jewish controlled MSM)

There’s a lot of money to be made now on body and vehicle armor that don’t work. So the more kids we send to Afghanistan to get blown up, the more the folks who make the body and vehicle armor that don’t work make.

(The MIC in America could be worth $1.5 trillion annually.....a lot of money, power and lobbying goes behind that using the American MSM. As with the Soviet Union this is harmful for America in the long term. A society that invests in war, and arms, but not in health care, education and welfare must slowly deteriorate, as happened with the Soviet Union.......which on the eve of collapse in 1989 was spending maybe around 14% of GDP on defense, 5.5 million men under arms, 65,000 tanks, 30,000 artillery, 12,000 nuclear warheads, 8500 combat jets, .....ALL this despite the best efforts of Gorbachov, after four years in power.

The excessive expenditure on defense starved out the expenditure on all the other necessary investment areas such as infrastructure, education, healthcare, social welfare, and innovation in technology which results in manufacturing better cars, tv, hi-fi...etc...America is no longer the leader this vital area. The best engineers and innovators invariably end up working in the defense industry, rather than creating things which have real social value, and which contribute to the expansion of the economy in a meaningful way.

Obviously since 1950 there has been a steady motion in this direction, but a strong administration can put a decisive break into that and forever save America from inevitable economic ruin. You simply can't have a $1500 billion MIC and not want to twitch and itch for war to justify such a huge expenditure.........the MIC and their Jewish overlords will find that excuse always, as they have.....so I say to the peace movement of America that the ultimate objective for America is not merely the withdrawal from the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the dismantling of the MIC, and a reorientation of the American culture away from war)

The neoconservatives who push our war agenda are invested in it, and they have, incredibly, gained a toehold in intellectually elite circles. That the "dumbest freaking human being on the planet," Cheney sycophant Doug Feith, managed to become a visiting lecturer at Columbia University gives you an idea of how badly the national brain trust has been damaged by neoconservative influence. He eventually got canned, but he never should have been hired in the first place.

(Jewish Israeli Zealot Douglas Feith with the Celtic name is not dumb.......he is an accomplished lawyer, with connections to the MIC. He is a ardent Zionist Israeli firster, holding an Israeli Passport, and who penned the "Clean Break" 1996 document with other Neo-cons for Benjamin Netanyahu to be more bold in foreign policy, and then the PNAC 2000. He lived in Israel for many years.

Merely dismissing him as, "dumbest freaking human being on the planet," is a dangerously misleading disinformation, unintentional though it is. Feith knew perfectly well what he was doing FOR LIKUD ISRAEL, whilst serving in the Pentagon with Wolfowitz..........this very fact of his real agenda's led to his removal from that position in 2005, along with the rest.......as potential Israeli spys at the center of American security)

The Obama administration has finally had direct talks with Iran. As physicist Gordon Prather wrote recently, "Director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency Secretariat Mohamed ElBaradei is seeking approval by the Obama-Biden administration of an agreement which ‘could open the way for a complete normalization of relations between Iran and the international community.’"

Is it possible that the war crowd will allow that to happen? Prather notes that we’re on the verge of getting the kind of transparency on Iran’s nuclear program that Iran offered early on in the Bush administration, only to be shunned.

(2001, and 2003...everything America could have wished for Iran offered, but America at that time was not interested)

Let’s pray that Obama doesn’t make the mistake of listening to NATO or his generals or the right-wing noise machine, and does the smart thing by beginning to back out of Afghanistan, and continues toward normalizing relationships with Iran.

(There has been progression, no doubt borne by actual experience and the passage of time.....there was initial talk of invading Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and so forth within a few years in 2001.....Bush reiterated as much to Blair confidentially in January 2003. But this has not happened...so we must be grateful. Now Obama is in power, and hopefully significant new shifts can take place in American military planning under the new president/administration as he attempts to do the right thing domestically)

And, oh, mainstream media – especially the New York Times and the Washington Post – stop letting unnamed "officials" drop propaganda into your "news." That sort of thing gets us into wars we don’t need to fight.

______________________________________

Zardari Pakistan.

.
.
.
.

In Serving US Interest, This Pakistani Govt. Is In A Class Of Its Own

AHMED QURAISHI.com

You must be hearing a lot these days from the apologists of expanded US influence in Pakistan that every government in the past has accepted humiliating US conditions.

(between 1950---1969 Pakistan received about $4 billion in USA aid, and at today's currency rate that could be about $25 billion; half for military and half for economic aid. Doubtless the aid was welcomed by the Pakistan military who were the main instigators of friendship with the USA from the early 1950's......because it gave them, confidence viz India with the new American arms, which the Pakistan military subsequently used against India in 1965...if you remember.

Field Marshal Ayub Khan of the Pakistan Military was one of the first and most enthusiastic initiators of friendship with the USA. However over time he became very cynical when he experienced the reality of "co-operation" with the USA...Why do you think he wrote the auto-biography, "Friends not Masters"? (1967) Clearly a man writing from first hand experience.

.....have a good look at the Pakistani military Ahmed beta, and see if you can see any American influence over them. Little details like name tags on their uniforms, which give you the clues as to who runs the Pakistani military as their regional slave soldiers.......where the senior officers are trained/indoctrinated (USA/UK)..........who runs the Taliban?........Who created the recent mess which killed 175 innocent Pakistanis in a short time, for specific agenda goals?........one surmises that it was elements within the Pakistan military acting on orders from the USA.........The Taliban has always been a proxy of the Pakistan military; their logistics is from the Pakistan military......the recent terrorist attacks generate sympathy for and around the Pakistan military as a national institution which ordinary Pakistanis can rely on, and for America, which further engages the Pakistan Taliban in an ceaseless war......that will also wear down the Pakistan military in Waziristan.

The recent terrorist attacks also deflect attention away from the failures of the present regime....and the public's focus to do something about the Taliban problem. So I think the recent spate of attacks in Pakistan were instigated by the supporters of the current regime, clearly interested in maintaining them in power, and as victims of terrorism.

The Indian army of the Raj was the great military tool which the British used around the globe to enforce the British empire. With independence and Partition that useful tool of the British Raj disappeared.......but not completely. In the case of the Pakistan military it continued to play that role, albeit in a more limited sense. The Indian military after independence was never allowed to play that role again for the British, given the strict control the Congress party exercised over the Indian military, and over all civilian control. The Pakistan military since 1947 has served as a proxy of British and later USA interests in the Middle East/Gulf region, and South Asia.

Once you "understand " the Pakistan military, you Ahmed Beta will understand Pakistan's problems much better. Its one thing for the Pakistan military to truly defend Pakistan in real situations of national threats, it is quite another for the Pakistan military to be used for the agenda's of gora powers from the other side of the world, against Pakistan's interests and the interests of Pakistan's neighbors.

Why did the Pakistan military back Jundallah against Iran. Because America told them to? Is that it? How does that fundamentally benefit Pakistan the nation; the neighbor of Iran.

Why did the Pakistan military back the Taliban against Afghanistan from 1994?

Why does the Pakistan military back insurgency groups against India.)

In fact, on Wednesday, government's PR wizards working under the direction of the PPP media team published a preposterous propaganda piece on the front page of one of the national dailies alleging that, "Jinnah also appealed for US aid."

(Doubtful......in his short time as head of Pakistan, it is unlikely he developed close relations with Americans, he was an archetypal Anglophile, pre-occupied as he was with creating Pakistan. I do know however that he did try to get his hands on the Nizam of Hyderabad's wealth, who at that time was one of the richest men in the world, with an estimated personal wealth of $2 billion or more...which at today's prices would be around $220 billion?. The Muslim League's upper echelon were not that concerned with taking the begging bowl to the USA, again because most of them were products of Mackauley's Brown Sahibs Anglophiles, however after Liaqat Ali Khan's assassination in 1951, the Pakistan military with urgings from senior British officers became more enthusiastic about courting the USA, and a source of arms which would counter balance the power of India in South Asia.)

The government media team is keen to convince Pakistanis that humiliating foreign conditions on aid are kosher because that is what previous Pakistani governments have been doing. Shamelessly, even the Quaid-e-Azam has been dragged into this government propaganda.

(There is no solid proof that foreign aid actually helps a country economically in the long run. In poor failed states foreign aid often becomes a political tool of the rich country rather than as a real economic assistance to help the whole nation.

......AND people keep telling me Pakistan is poor and in need of aid, but is it really that poor? Its GDP must be close to $500 billion, measured by PPP...of which only $300 billion PPP probably belongs to the registered official economy...and of which only $50 billion PPP is covered by the national budget. Perhaps $150---$300 billion PPP of Pakistan's wealth is abroad under capital flight as a result of the actions of the corrupt disloyal elite....Tamindars/Zamindars............the 30 Business families and the military multi-millionaires.....when you look at that overall economic scenario Pakistan is rich, and can be very rich if its own resources were put to good effective, efficient use.

It is in that sense, with the effective domestic mobilization of resources that foreign aid is both irrelevant, distorting and counter-productive, because they induce and bribe key government officers into making the wrong decisions which harm Pakistan's long term overall interests.)

While the record of previous governments is debatable, what's beyond doubt is that this is the first government in Pakistan that came through a 'deal' brokered by US and UK diplomats, whitewashing the illegal wealth of individuals who enjoy a dubious record. This has never happened before in the history of any Pakistani government.

(The regime of General Zia ul Haq which came to power with active American backing in 1977, could be described in many respects as similar to the current regime.....in fact worse, when you think of what they did overall in 11 years:

• Primitive Islamisation of Pakistan society......which takes Pakistan backwards, rather than looking to the future progressively as a modern state.
• The funding of Afghan mujaheddin of the worst Islamic type, instead of moderate Afghan's.
• The creation of proxy internal SUNNI hardline Islamic groups, which wage jihad against Shia Pakistanis, Iran, and India, without proper control and supervision by the state.
• The entry of Israeli intelligence and military personnel into Pakistan for the first time in the 1980's, who train some of the Mujaheddin, and become major players in the supply and control of the arms of ex-Soviet equipment to the Mujaheddin....Israel had stockpiles of it from the Arab/Israeli wars, and finally later become involved with supplying Pakistan parts for its nuclear program. The recruitment of Pakistani military officers to work for MOSSAD.......Busharaf being the most significant success for Israel, slowly being maneuvered into power as head of state in 1999.
• The killing of political figures by the Pakistan military in Pakistan because it was suitable for the foreign powers.
• The introduction of Islam into the military, and the promotion of an officers career based on his Islamic beard/tabligi credentials.....not smart.

In the overall scheme of things, spanning 11 years the Zia ul Haq military regime did more harm to Pakistan in surrendering the sovereignty of Pakistan to foreign hostile powers, MOSTLY INFORMALLY, in comparison to the current civilian criminal government of Zardari bhai, attempting to formally surrender. But at least as civilian government parliament is debating the big serious issues and the Pakistani public is getting a look-in {not under Zia, Busharaf}. The folly of the Zia ul Haq regime initially, has allowed foreign hostile powers subsequently to impose brazenly disadvantageous terms on Pakistan which will have negative effects on Pakistan's future...............the current set of demands by America merely formalizes what was set by Zia ul Haq informally before, originally in the 1970's. The Kerry/Lugar aid package is the product of 40 years of American experience with Pakistan, not yesterday, not merely by dealing with Zardari bhai only now. He has been power for little over one year)

I bet even the Americans have never seen before this kind of an 'easy' pro-US government in their decades-old record of meddling in other countries.

This alone should put to shame anyone who defends these shady characters in this government.

(The problem is not merely the civilians politicians, but that the civilian politicians are annexes, and part and parcel of the "game" of revolving doors where the military fuck it up yet again big time, or are simply removed because they have displeased their puppet masters, and the civilian politicians are brought in as time fillers, into power, until the military have recovered their confidence.

In that sense in this game of revolving doors of military/civilian, the main villain is the Pakistan military, as they are the most proactive group in Pakistani politics very often working in conjunction with hostile alien foreign powers.

It is very natural that Pakistanis must want to believe that there is something good in their society, an institution which is loyal to Pakistan.......that institution is not the Pakistan military however....it is the worst enemy of Pakistan. It is simply naive given clear historical facts to think otherwise.

Once ordinary Pakistanis have emotionally detached themselves from the Pakistani military (most Baluchis, Bengali's, Sindhi's, and a sizable portion Pashtuns already have) then the forces of true Pakistani nationalism can move forward. Expecting the Pakistani military to be arbiters and guarantors of Pakistan's sovereignty, ruling Pakistan in a judicious balanced way is BOTH naive and illogical.

The Pakistan military created the Afghan and Pakistan Taliban.....and they control these two organizations, as they did the FATA Taliban, on the advice of foreign hostile alien powers.

The Pakistan military often use the Taliban as a cover for their destabilization programs against AND WITHIN Pakistan, and civilian governments...which invariably results in the death of huge numbers of Pakistanis, both innocent civilians, and when the Pakistan military fight their own created monsters in the mountains of the NWFP, on the advice/orders of hostile alien powers.......a wholly stupid scenario.

The Pakistan military often conducts its large military operations ONLY because of pressure and "orders" from Washington, and not because they themselves believe whole heartedly that they are fighting and undertaking a just war against their own controlled and created monsters, the Pakistan Taliban, the Afghan Taliban.

Intellectual Pakistani Punjabis must drop their naive pretensions about their military........the Pakistani military is the main problem in Pakistan......the 1000 pound guerrilla in the room......a force of 800,000 backed by 300,000 paramilitary, which use's illegal force and violence within Pakistan, as de juere manual policy, declared and undeclared to carry out its objectives, very often at the behest of and guidance of hostile alien foreign entities.

Removing Zardari and his criminal clowns does not begin to address the real problems of Pakistan, but will merely be an useful start. As long as we don't think that some how removing Zardari will solve all Pakistan's problems, there after. After Zardari is removed, the military problem has to be solved. Zardari makes the military look good, but that is merely deceptive and not the reality. )

Pakistanis should rest assured of one thing. The challenge of governing Pakistan and subduing this nation in the service of a foreign agenda is a difficult task. It's above and beyond the intellectual capacity of the rulers in Islamabad today.

(The eternal struggle of many in Third World nations, not just Pakistan. Clearly the rulers of Pakistan, the Tamindars, Zamindars, the 30 business families and the military aren't doing their job...............Pakistan is failed state number 9, with a whole array of problems...socio-economic and political.

In that sense, with a holistic perspective of the reality of power in Pakistan, Pakistanis, just like millions of others around the Third World must struggle for their country, and its sovereignty, and its true development. Predatory powers such as the USA/UK will naturally attempt to undermine that, as they done so over so many decades.

The key in all this is Islamabad, the seat of power in Pakistan. One would like to see Pakistanis peacefully reoccupy Islamabad, .............{unlike the actions of the Pakistan Taliban carried out at the behest of the Pakistan military and their foreign masters to distract and defect from the real national issues and failings.....Zardari is corrupt puppet...sorry we must fight the Taliban first......America is taking over Pakistan....sorry we must fight the Taliban.....the economy is in a mess.....sory we must fight the Taliban first......etc}.....How does one get rid of an alien imposed government which displays clear criminal intent under Zardari........Zardari merely disappearing from media view will not solve the fundamental problems, but ONLY through people power, and the occupation and direct usurpation of power by the people peacefully can Pakistanis finally regain control of their country from the hostile alien powers.

PLEADING, BEGGING, RATIONALIZING, RIDICULING FOREIGN BACKED CRIMINALS WILL NOT GET PAKISTAN ANYWHERE. ONLY PEOPLE POWER ACTION IN ISLAMABAD will, PEACEFULLY.)

As the challenge mounts, these shady characters will run away abroad in a few months' time with their fat bank accounts and will never look back. They will leave and never look back sooner or later.

(The standard pattern......Shaukat Aziz in the USA....and all the rest to MOSSAD Busharaf waiting in London to see if his been "chosen" to lead Pakistan again........Altaf Hussain in London......Zardari will also go to his $ 10 million Surrey mansion London, and maybe meet up with MOSSAD Busharaf over tea at a five star hotel. So we know from the simple fact OF where the criminals run to, which are the true hostile alien powers in internal Pakistan politics since 1947....you don't have to be Einstein. Which are the true hostile alien powers which interfere with Pakistani politics to its long term detriment, who provide safe havens for these national criminals)

While criticizing this ruling class, we need to send a note of thank you to Mr. Musharraf for 'dealing' us this hand as a parting gift to the nation.

Pakistanis should recognize this distinction about the current Pakistani government in the debate over the record of past Pakistani rulers in dealing with Washington.

(No they shouldn't..............this is the fruit of a long process that began in 1954, when Mohammed Ali Bogra with Ayub Khan signed the Treaty with the USA in 1954 for military/economic aid, with the tacit encouragement of the UK in the background.............Zaradri is merely the last and worst fruition of a long on-going process which has been primarily aided by the PAKISTAN MILITARY)

The current government, in this debate, is in a class of its own.

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/10/its-not-question-of-mere-honor-its.html

Brzezinski's perspectives on Afghanistan.

.
.
.
.
Brzezinski on the endless Afghan quagmire:
Interviewed by Josh Rushing of al-Jazeera.


Brzezinski with a Pakistani military officer in the early 1980's.
..
.
The architect of the policy to fund the Fundamentalist Islamic Afghan resistance groups, aka Mujaheddin via Pakistan's military from July 1979 with presidential approval, against the Communist Kabul government in Afghanistan which had just come into power in 1978, and backed by the Soviet Union, gives a short significant interview.
.
The primary purpose of Operation Cyclone which may seem odd on the surface (Capitalist Liberal Democratic America backing Islamic fundamentalists) was to 1) Defeat a Soviet backed Satellite state. 2) Draw the Soviet Union into a military quagmire, which consequently depletes its resources, and thus weakens the state......the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 had a little to do with the 9 year Afghan adventure by the Soviet Union. 3) Revenge for Vietnam, whose primary military backer with advisers was the Soviet Union.
.
.......So the man who has focused on the area for 30 odd years, quite pertinently, as national security adviser to President Carter initially, certainly knows what he is talking about, without all the emotional attachment of working in that field now, and the attendant vested interests, or political interests. Note the language is quite sober and precise, without relying on the crutch of sensationalism, trying to appeal to emotion.......like...."We are 45 minutes away from a Iraqi WMD attack against America."........."If we don't fight them over there, we'd have to fight them over here."
.
What does he have to say on the matter?


at 15 seconds into interview......."We want a POL--I--TICALLY acceptable outcome.......We want a POL--I--TICALLY acceptable outcome..... something we can live with; in terms of our national interests. Its something in my judgment obtainable, in the regional context, and it is something specifically which reduces the risks posed to us by "al-Qaeda"."
.
(America can achieve its objectives in Afghanistan, which I must surmise includes a friendly local Afghan central government that is competent, effective governance wise, not corrupt, is security wise cohesive and can hold its own against the Taliban, backed by effective state institutions.....so that America does not have to be there for ever.
.
However this cannot be achieved with the present installed puppet regime of Hamid Karzai of UNICOL, with his brother in the background as the biggest drugs runner in the country, and his VP is no better. If "American occupied" South Korea with 37,000 American soldiers can have competent government why not Afghanistan? If "American occupied" Japan with 50,000 American soldiers can have competent government why not Afghanistan? If "American occupied" Germany with 70,000 American soldiers can have competent government why not Afghanistan?
.
.........we hope in answering such a question we don't fall back on racist, religiously biased answers to provide an explanation for our current set of problems in Afghanistan (casual racism is OK over dinner within the intimacy of friends and family, but not as a serious state policy)....It will be great for America's image if it can prove that despite being Israel's butt buddy number one, it can manage and effectively run a Muslim country with rationality, with a modicum of good intentions (doesn't have to be outright love) and fairness.
.
A failed state generates armed groups whether with criminal intentions or political intentions, and it is within this failed state scenario it is said that groups like "al-Qaeda" thrive, as had happened during the Afghan civil war of 1991--1996. You can have failed states under foreign military occupation as with the case of Iraq, Afghanistan, Cambodia and South Vietnam.............or China under Japanese occupation. The condition of a occupied state depends primarily on the intentions and activities of the superior occupation force with military power......and not on the puppets they install.)

Josh Rushing: "Do you think a full blown counter-insurgency effort could actually work? Would you see Western style democracy version in Afghanistan..........."

Brzezinski: starts laughing........"Well excuse me for laughing but the combination of the two I just find bizarre; and its so ahistorical (goes against historical experience and facts).....a foreign occupation tends to mobilize opposition (from the locals), and the more intense and large scale it is, the larger the (local) opposition becomes...........therefore when we talk about counter-insurgency we have to feed into the equation, how will the people in that country react at some point.........if we become the principle mechanism for the counter-insurgency. In other words if Afghans are fighting the Taliban, counter-insurgency can succeed. If we are fighting the Taliban (as has been the case for the last 8 years) the chances are if we give 40,000 more troops for counter-insurgency against the existing levels of the Taliban, and a year from now we may be fighting Taliban levels which are 25% higher. Then we have to send more troops in...etc etc"
.
I disagree with Brzezinski on the issue of democracy. For me it is a universal gift which ALL societies can benefit from and learn to accept to different degrees depending on their level of economic development and education level.

But he is right on the military issue.......in October 2001, America succeeded in Afghanistan against 40,000---50,000 Taliban and Arab Afghanis ("al-Qaeda") with some special forces, and the Northern Alliance......after the victory it was augmented to 9,000 troops by December 2001..........and now swollen to 70,000 (Obama has already promised 21,000 more after initially coming to office......in my opinion a hasty decision). The Americans are backed by 35,000 NATO....so 100,000 occupation forces + 200,000 Afghan government military, and paramilitary forces + 50,000 tribal militia loyal to the warlords on the government side ..............VERSES about 10,000 Taliban regular fighters. If there is STILL a problem now after 8 years of occupation in Afghanistan, then it is political problem of mismanagement in Afghanistan and Pakistan, AND not a military problem.
.
Once it is identified as a political problem and possibly even a socio-economic problem then the correct solutions using the relevant experts can be applied.
.
Obama has a duty to look at the Afghan problem through a different lens, and apply solutions which are markedly different than those of his predecessor, both for ideological reasons and for practical reasons. In all events he must not be painted into a corner prematurely with certain actions and decisions which tie his hands policy wise, and reduce his ability to maneuver in this critical area.......more troops, more casualties, more costs, more media uproar and criticism to do something usually more drastic, in the future.
.
He can wait.....and according to Senator John Kerry no major policy decisions should be made whilst the Afghan elections are on-going.

Josh Rushing: "Could a further build-up (of troops) in Afghanistan lead to this being Obama's Vietnam?"

Brzezinski: "Well...If you pursue wrong policies (from the Bush era), you can call it Obama's Vietnam or you can call it anything else, or it might be quite new, but it will still be pretty bad.......When we went into Afghanistan eight years ago to over throw the Taliban, after 9/11, we did it largely with some airforce; 300 special forces, and Afghans who were enthusiastically on our side, because they viewed us as the people who helped them against the Soviets.......we overthrew the Taliban quickly, and now eight years later we have 60,000 American troops, and our military commanders are telling us that we are not winning....what does that tell you?
.
"Where is the resistance? Obviously from the Taliban, but Afghans who increasing identify themselves with something which they were pleased to see overthrown eight years ago; that is a bad trend"
.
Some what paradoxical that the very strategy Brzezinski had devised against the Soviets in Afghanistan, in order to weaken the Soviet Union, and revenge Vietnam.....is being foolishly pursued textbook style by the Pentagon...along the same failed path.

Clearly Karzai, his team of international drug smugglers, his Pentagon handlers with the other foreign advisers aren't doing their job adequately. We often focus on the failure of Afghanistan on the Afghans themselves......oh these people are primitive, from the stone age you know....blah blah...blah ...which supposedly explains why Afghanistan is a failed state number 7 from the bottom...but what if 90% of the reason for this failure after 8 years of occupation was primarily because of the occupation forces themselves?
.
In all events Karzai needs to be got rid of, and new Afghan players brought in, who are more effective, AND who are given more responsibility. I don't think power sharing with the Taliban is the correct solution, that will be a sign of failure, and if enough Afghan are still disgruntled with the occupation they will fight, regardless of the orders of Mullah Omer.....realistically can't see him sitting in the Afghan cabinet under a coalition/national unity government anyway.
.

Josh Rushing: "Does it look to you like a similar trend the Soviet Union followed in Afghanistan?"


Brzezinski: "Oh, I've been saying that for the last three years. I've been saying that the Soviets went into Afghanistan on the erroneous assumption that using Communists; Afghan Communists from the big cities; they could create a Communist society in Afghanistan....and they discovered within a year that they were viewed as universal enemies. Well we are to some extent the same based on whether we view as Western Afghans, democratic Afghans, or even imposing elections on them for which they are not prepared....and eight years after our involvement we are beginning to discover that its rough going, so I think it is high time we draw some lessons from it. And those lessons should not involve the mechanical transfer to Afghanistan our own experience, or our own values, our own political system. I am baffled why we preceded with these elections.....based on the American model of polling stations, candidates, debates.....and now perhaps even a run off election....why not a Jirga which is a traditional way Afghans elect their leaders......why impose this mechanism?"
.
(America primarily did not go into Afghanistan with the intention of nation building.

Is there a comprehensive policy paper from the State Department which in minute detail states how Afghan society will be transformed into a modern function democracy?

.....no I don't think so.....what America is doing is going through the motions of democracy window dressing, BUT is not investing realistically and earnestly, where it matters, which would indicate to us that they are serious about creating a truly democratic society in Afghanistan............To this end 95% of American expenditure in Afghanistan is spent on the military....and war...and "counter-insurgency".......and the result of this American expenditure is quite obvious for all to see........and the Afghans living in the country know this to be the fact.......The Americans aren't spending on infrastructure, roads, bridges, canals, public buildings, schools, hospitals, factories, dams, power stations, warehouses........etc etc......The greatest and best contributions to Afghan infrastructure is being carried out by India and Iran.....NOT the USA.
.
However this bit of Bush II legacy does not have to continue. All Obama has to do is create a realistic and comprehensive marshal plan for Afghanistan, which is fully monitored and followed through.....SPENDING CONSTRUCTIVELY ON THE AFGHAN PEOPLE, which Americans can be proud off.......long after they have left the country.
.
To do that you don't need more military, but more investments into the Afghan people. You don't need 100,000 occupation forces and the defense expenditure of $65 billion....or is it actually $80 billion annually......or is the actual annual military expenditure on Afghanistan ....$100 billion.....fighting ...what?.............10,000 tribesmen armed with AK-47.
.
This is a sham and yet another Pentagon scam...and hopefully Obama can turn this around with his set of new policies viz Afghanistan.

For America, or for Likud Israel?

.
.
.
.
Long Wars and Peace Prizes
by Jeff Huber, October 13, 2009 at Antiwar.com


Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who has become the point man for the long-war mafia, delivered his ultimatum to President Barack Obama on Friday, Oct. 9. As has been his practice over the past several weeks, McChrystal proxy-leaked details of his demands through the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and other sources. The Journal says one of McChrystal’s proposed options calls for 60,000 additional troops, and "several officials" say the "maximum variant" is even larger.

.
(This won't solve the Taliban problem, unless you are seriously talking about invading Pakistan proper, and dealing with them in Baluchistan, and the NWFP, which the Pakistan army will never do themselves, and can never do, and nor will they countenance American intervention......otherwise, therefore the Taliban "problem" will always linger........AND if you are thinking about invading Pakistan then you will require a heck of a lot more troops than a mere 60,000 more, unless after this escalation is granted you subsequently shout for more troops and more..............if later the American recession begins then your options for troop escalation and sustaining them will be limited anyway)

.
How odd it will seem to future historians that the world’s sole superpower seriously considered escalating a war in a country that is not a threat to anyone. The most insane tenet of McChrystal’s proposals is to train up 400,000 Afghan security forces. 400,000 armed and trained Afghans is the last thing we want. Five years from now we’ll have to deploy 60,000 troops to defend Iran from Afghanistan. Won’t that be a kick in the cup?

.

(Afghanistan given its level of governance, management, corruption, economic size and national resources can at best sustain a 100,000 military, and an additional 100,000 police and paramilitary; total 200,000; the projected 400,000 is way too unrealistic, and unsustainable.....creating more problems rather than actually solving anything in Afghanistan. Investing huge amounts of money on security when the money could be better spent on the Afghan people, and nation through infrastructure projects, education, health care, agricultural subsidies.....which permanently ingratiates them to America)

A "senior military official" says McChrystal is concerned that some of Obama’s advisers are telling him the Taliban are not a threat to the United States. That would be tantamount to Obama’s advisers telling him the sun doesn’t rise in the West. The Taliban want us to leave their country, that’s all. They may or may not get back control of Afghanistan if we leave it, but why should we care? Afghans have been controlling their own affairs for thousands of years, and not once have they invaded Poland or France.
.

(The Taliban created by America in 1994, through the Pakistan military, and initially funded by certain Gulf countries was never a threat to the USA....It is a regional insurgency outfit controlled by the Pakistan military to achieve strategic depth viz India in Afghanistan, and envisaged as a force for stability, after the civil war which ensued when the Soviets departed Afghanistan.....The Taliban does not have any globalist pretensions and ambitions, factually stretched embellishments from Neocons aside.

.

The Taliban realistically numbers about 10,000 armed with AK-47, operating for the last 15 years in Afghanistan, Baluchistan and the NWFP, areas where significant numbers of ethnic Pashtun dominate. So although an Islamic fundamentalist movement its true root/base is as an ethnic vehicle for the Pashtun community based in Afghanistan and Pakistan.........beyond this limited ethnic theater it has no further ambitions.)

The Times quotes the senior military official (he insisted on anonymity because he’s a sanctioned leaker) as saying, "The real question is, do you want the Taliban to be in power in Afghanistan? If you don’t, then they have to be addressed through a counterinsurgency campaign."

.

(The Taliban don't have to be in power in Kabul....the Taliban is an ethnic Pashtun political/military vehicle controlled by the Pakistan military, which represents 40% of Afghans.......or to put it another way 60% of Afghan's are not Pashtun. The Northern Alliance is a credible center of power which is not Taliban, and there must be other centers of power within Afghan civil society which is not Taliban.

.

Obviously when you promote murderers, criminals, drug trafficking warlords into the mainstream power structure of Afghanistan under foreign occupation, and project these very same people to ordinary Afghan's as sanctioned allies of American OVERTLY, and when ordinary Afghan's can patently observe and see them for what they really are, pure unadulterated criminals, there will obviously be a certain level of disenchantment which will set in, and a misguided yearning for sections of Afghan society out of sheer desperation to want to wish the old Taliban back into power in Afghanistan....................BUT this does not have to happen, when America leaves eventually....as they surely must.

.

America should not waste its time fighting the Taliban, a thankless theoretically endless task given that there are 36 million Pashtun's in Af/Pak (6/7 million Pashtun men of military age?), but rather concentrate politically in grooming alternative credible leaders within Afghanistan who are effective, competent, have a mass support base, and finally who are organized militarily, and can seriously challenge the Taliban......The Northern Alliance shorn of its colorful characters; Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, RAWA and many other groups....America enables "good" moderate Afghans to both run their own country, and withstand the onslaught of the Pakistan military controlled Taliban.
.
This does not mean ignoring the ethnically dominant Pashtuns, but finding moderate characters within their community who will work with a new government.

.

Finally it must mean ditching Karzai and the sham election circus for a better set of political leaders in Afghanistan. There sheer corruption, ineptitude fuels decisively a significant portion of the insurgency, which is then managed by the Pakistani military)

Poppycock. There are ways to address the Taliban other than through the kind of nation-birthing counterinsurgency campaign that McChrystal and his allies – who include Gen. David Petraeus and Adm. Mike Mullen – are trying to cram up our nose pores. Our counterinsurgency doctrine is a crock of beans. In the case of Afghanistan, it purports that we can transport a culture from the Middle Age to the 21st century by flooding it with teenagers armed with M-16s, Oakley sunglasses, and inferior body armor.

.

(It will create a greater mess)

If the Taliban take back power in Afghanistan, so what? Hamid Karzai, the guy in power whom we’re backing now, is a knock-knock joke (Who’s there? Nobody). We’d have been far better off after 9/11 to tell one-eyed, illiterate Taliban leader Mohammed Omar to cough up Osama bin Laden in return for a shiny new Cadillac. At the cost of many millions of Cadillacs later, we’re no further along in Afghanistan than we were from the outset.

.

( Mullah Omer head of the Taliban requested evidence of Osama's culpability in 9/11 before they considered handing him over to be tried in a court of law, from the American government........which was not forth coming, and hasn't been produced since; The FBI don't have him as a suspect on their website of the 9/11 culprits......so the refusal to hand him over to America was taken as a no, and America attacked Taliban Afghanistan in October 2001)

Obama’s National Security Adviser James Jones says al-Qaeda now has fewer than 100 fighters, and even McChrystal admits they aren’t in Afghanistan. Someone needs to explain why we should escalate a foreign war to counter a threat that is insignificant.

Pouring more troops into Afghanistan would be a travesty. We need to go back to a global security posture that looks like the one we had before we got into the business of nation-birthing, one in which we strike surgically with naval, air, and special operations forces, and step away. Invading and occupying countries as a national pastime is a grand strategy for fools.

Fred Kagan, the darling of the military-industrial-congressional complex, was a key contributor to McChrystal’s Afghanistan analysis. Neocon Kagan is a professional warmonger who never saw a war he didn’t like or couldn’t justify. (Defense contracts for all my friends!)

.

(Ah the Jewish neo-cons......what would we do without them?)

The Pentagon’s blatant media assault on President Obama continues. It began around Sept. 18 when a McClatchy article noted that the military is growing "impatient" with Obama on Afghanistan and cited unnamed "officers at the Pentagon in Kabul" as saying McChrystal will resign if he doesn’t get what he wants. The leak of his analysis to Bob Woodward came on Sept. 21, in a story that warned "More Forces or Mission Failure." McChrystal’s 60 Minutes infomercial on Sept. 27 was a Douglas MacArthur-like act of blatant insubordination. McChrystal followed that with a speech in London to a warfare-centric think-tank in which he repeated his position: if Obama doesn’t give me what I want, it will be his fault when we lose.

Among the latest assaults is an Oct. 11 article from right-wing media maven Rupert Murdoch’s Times of London that heralds "Barack Obama ready to pay fighters to ditch the Taliban." Times doesn’t mention that bribing insurgents is precisely how "King David" Petraeus created the illusion of success in the Iraq surge. The article notes that "Despite five war councils in two weeks, President Barack Obama has so far failed to come up with a strategy for the conflict." The Pentagon has had eight years to come up with a strategy for Afghanistan and failed to come up with anything better than its long-war mantra, a policy that says we can’t win, we just want to keep fighting. Now, the lack of a coherent strategy is somehow the fault of Obama, who has been commander in chief for less than a year.

.

(Paying money to Taliban members to stop fighting occupation forces is a loser .....how do you determine which of the 6/7 million Pashtuns of fighting age in Af/Pak is a member of the Taliban?....whats to stop all of them coming forward to volunteer not to fight again as Taliban.........in a region with very low incomes this might work out as a good scam for many impoverished Pashtuns......but, how do you guarantee that once money is taken as a bribe they won't fight again, whats to stop them reneging on their promise....speaking of financial scams this is exactly the sort of thing which allows sticky fingered Pentagon/military officials to make some war profits on the side.........."Monday 2,000 Taliban came forward........we gives them $1,000 each......so total $4 million.......yea yea write that down on the receipt book..........there's Abdul, and Abdul, and Abdul, and Abdul, and his brother Abdul, and his cousin Abdul, and his nephew Abdul, and his friend Mohammed, and .........Tuesday $5 million....Wednesday $10 million big ones...........Woowoa, Mr. President keep it coming, we're winning ."
.

If we recall a few trillion $ are unaccounted for in the Pentagon ledger, as stated in 10th September 2001 by Donald Rumsfeld. "al-Qaeda" helpfully killed ALL the accountants in the one room, out of thousands in the Pentagon, looking for those Pentagon zillions, unfortunately the next day on 9/11.

.

Seriously.........lets fund Afghan's who are really honest, effective and not corrupt to run their own country instead......lets give these types the money.....they are not difficult to find, because most Afghan's belong to this category.......lets get rid of Karzai finally....then put the squeeze on the Pakistan military to stop funding the Taliban.)

.
Obama made an enormous mistake when he called the Afghanistan conflict a "war of necessity." We need to fight in Afghanistan like fish need running shoes. Afghanistan is a discombobulated society that couldn’t work itself out of a paper bag. Al-Qaeda consists of fewer than 100 fighters, and the Taliban, which our intelligence describes as a "franchise operation," has no interest in or capability of invading the United States.

Let’s hope our Nobel winner finds the courage to stand up to the media blitz he’s facing.

Pessimism will get America and the Democrats nowhere.

.
.
.
.
An insightful, some what frustrated, pessimistic, impatient article by Professor Dave Green, outta Noo Yawk.
.
He is of course quite right that Obama is in danger of being the night watchman, during whose reign the Second Great Depression is ushered in, and thus his administration becomes a motionless dud presidency "fixed"policy wise by economic decline, and he leaves office with an unnoticeable legislative whimper; a one term wonder, all smiles or maybe not later, filled with cross-party compromise/surrender; the uniqueness/novelty of being a black presidency, with a Nobel Peace prize; with on-going wars and not much else. Then a rabid mother of all right wing government comes into power in 2012, under Chilling moose Sarah Palin..........and civilization as we know it ends.......Jesus does a second coming ......read the book.........seen the play.......and the movie.
.
But realistically he has only been in power for just over 8 months, so lets give him a few more months to up his game for America and the world, which presumably the Nobel Peace Prize was trying to nudge him to do for the international community.
.
In understanding American politics, or Western politics generally, one must grasp Israeli politics first, which has shifted markedly to the extreme right lead by the Likud Party. Jewish intellectual thinking especially in Western countries lead by this particular tribal urge from Israel, and the Likud Party, with its fronts and Think Tanks in the West, have made an aggressive assault on the fundamental political thinking of Western societies through various ideological vehicles such as Monetarism, Reagan economics, Neocons........and so forth, dominated all by Jewish intellectuals.
.
You can have good governments both from the center-left and the center-right, it does not matter, as long as the leaders of such parties surrounded by good team players have the right mix of policies which are implemented judiciously, through the national legislature, purely with the interests of the country in which they serve in mind.
.
The problem starts when you have pseudo-Fascists junta's installed at Israel's/Likud's behest in sophisticated Western societies; then what you have is the inevitable disconnect.......the peculiar bizzare BS from the figurehead Israeli card board cut out fronts trying to fit the Israeli centric policies into the domestic square pegs..........Bush II America; Silvio Berlesconi Italy; José Maria Aznar/ Spain; Sarkozy/France. In many respects NOT REAL political leaders of sophisticated Western countries, but circus clowns with the ensuing theatrics.
.
But why is Israel Fascist/Nazi orientated, aren't they supposed to be kosher Jews given sanctuary on Palestinian land to appease "Western guilt"?
.
The reason is simple. In many societies it is the extremist/zealot who is more vociferous and assertive, and consequently it is their agenda which dominates the political plain. In the case of Israel perhaps only 30% of Israelis are true Likudniks, but their aggressive political campaigning means that invariably it is their agenda which usually dominates the political discourse in Israel. It is more than likely that the majority of Israelis want PEACE and ENGAGEMENT with the Palestinians (70%). Israelis like all humans are normal people who enjoy going to beaches for a party, or at home enjoying the intimate company of friends and family, over dinner, the simple basic pleasures of life.
.
HOWEVER, the Likud minority do not wish this. They dream of Eretz Israel; an Israel which is ethnically/racially jackboot pure; an Israel which is a superpower, surrounded by dismembered Arab states, which fear Israel and bow to it. Whilst the Israeli military reminds them continually who is master in the region, frequently,viciously with impunity. These Likudnik "FANTASY DREAMS" cannot be achieved through traditional "Kibbutzim Socialism", and so Israel's fundamental ideological base must be redefined, markedly to the right....far xenophobic rabid right....which then absolves you of genocide, mass murder, colonialism, continued illegal wars.......at least to yourself, and your conscience. After that all you do is go to your local Synagogue and the Rabbi blesses you...and its ALL back to normal.
.
This long process started during the 1970's in Israel, and the UK and USA in the 1980's, consequentially linked a little later. Sir Keith Joseph the ideological mentor of Thatcher in Britain in the Conservative party, and in America numerous Jewish intellectuals, such as Milton Friedman, under the Ronald Reagan administration,starting preaching from the early eighties. The Neocons changed their political colors from a Jewish Trotskyite group based in America into a hardline Israeli Likud linked front more recently.
.
In addition Israel is a tiny country of little over 5 million Jews, and there is only so much it can do, surviving on American largess, and significant donations from global Jewry. For it to realize its Likudnik "DREAMS and FANTASY" of empire, it has to exert control over, domination and direction of key Western nations acting as its proxies.........USA/UK being foremost......France, Germany, Spain, Holland and so forth.....this means dominating the political/ideological debate in those countries so that they do the bidding of Likud Israel.
.
This is significantly assisted by the fake narrative of "al-Qaeda" and the open ended GWOT,which is purely a Israeli manufactured fake war.........and a civilisational conflict with Islam......."Israel's enemies are the Wests enemies"........which is of course not the reality; The rulers and elites of the 57 Muslim majority countries are allies and usually always puppets of the West, and not life threatening enemies........Libya and Iran are installed puppet regimes which have been in power unmolested mostly for 40/30 years respectfully...allowed to exist as boogie boogie scarecrow regimes.
.
Finally the Zionist media in the West, with channels such as "FUCK THE NEWS", Washington Post, NY Times, CBS, ABC and CNN setting the debate and agenda of Israel...........Israel would like to buy the British run Al-Jazeera, just to make sure its message is also beamed to the docile Arab people.
.
In such a scenario Professor David Green........evolving over 30 years by Jews with power, patronage, money, criminal intent, greed, the male ego.....militarism..........thoughts of "survival through expansion" ....for Israel to "survive" it must wage perpetual war...........Obama surrounded by Jews from Israel or otherwise (Axelrod/Immanuel)....has his work cut out facing and opposing the extremist right-wing "surge" from Israel which has been on-going for well over 30 years, AND in addition the strength of the Israeli lobby which follows Israel's dictates, AND finally and decisively the Zionist media in America.
.
You need to be a unique individual, and an unique administration to go against such a trend, and thus:

• EITHER, Obama's administration is a card board cut out non-government for 4 years..."Oh look everybody he is black, with a Muslim name as President of America".......Global audience.."Aaaaaawwwwwwww....shucks.....how marvelous............AND, AND , AND", a time filler administration which becomes the fall guy for the next American depression starting in 2010 (a general recession is not inevitable in the USA).........gracefully/obediently ushering in a rabid right-wing government after him in 2012.
• OR, Obama institutes comprehensive policies in both the domestic and foreign policy arena which serves/saves America exclusively, against the dictates of Likud Israel from the background, and which allow's him to serve a second term.

It goes without saying that courage and imagination is required to achieve the second option.

________________________

"Barry In The Bush With Smiles"

By David Michael Green. October 09, 2009 "Information Clearing House"

-- It takes a real artist to render a crushing majority into a hapless political object.

(After being nominated as the Democrat presidential candidate in 2008, presumably the entire party has accepted him as unquestioned dear leader, and that he has attempted to reinforce this with employment for Hilary in key policy posts....amongst others....so he has no worries about his party supporting his policy agenda's as their dear leader. So why this need to reach out to Republicans?.......Is this a style thang?....Is it bearing fruit? )

And Barack Obama is a real artist.

He’s had quite an impressive week. At least for an anvil.

Here’s one New York Times headline, regarding the Olympics debacle: “Chicago Is Rejected in First Round of Voting”. Impressive.

(Not a big deal, unless you are a real Obama hater, out to nitpick.....High time South America was given a chance to stage the Olympics........and the corrupt prone Olympic Committee decided as much. NOT a snub against Obama....just cus an American President makes a presentation/pitch to the IOC that should not automatically entitle America hosting the Olympics)

Here’s another: “Jobless Report Is Worse Than Expected; Rate Rises to 9.8%”. Can you say “Bye-bye, Barack”?

(Cut him some slack dude..........he has been in power for little over 8 months. It would be more accurate to say that the current dismal employment figures are the result of the mismanagement and criminality of Bush II, over 8 years)

Ah, but he was actually just warming up. David Paterson, the governor of New York, bitch-slapped the president for being stupid enough to lean on Paterson to get out of the 2010 race. Paterson is a disaster as governor, and Obama is worried that he’ll drag down the Democratic ticket, lowering the president’s majorities in Congress.

(Exercising his power and authority within his party....and signaling to others in the party that such behavior/standards will not be tolerated)

The first problem with that calculus is that there are fifty states in the union, notwithstanding the natural arrogance of New Yorkers who tend to think they own the planet. The Democratic Party’s problems are far bigger than New York. They begin on one end of Pennsylvania Avenue, and end on the other. As usual, most voters will be using the mid-term elections as a gut-check on their feelings about the current government. If the inept, cowardly and inert Mr. Obama needs someone to resign in order to save the party, that dude in the mirror with the big ol’ grin would be the most efficacious choice. Charlie Cook is now giving the Democrats only a fifty-fifty chance of retaining their majority in the House, which is now a whopping 79 seats. Man, you have to really work at it to blow something that badly in nine months time.

(Rather harsh......lets see what Obama does in the key domestic and foreign policy issues over the next few months, BEFORE the mid-term elections in 2010.......ONLY by then if he loses badly, and he hasn't made any fundamental policy changes which are clearly distinct from the BUSH II junta (where we know he could have made a difference, and had the capacity to do so, but deliberately stalled) can we begin to call him a dud presidency.......just another Jew front........blah blah blah.......a night watchman......before the Jew institutes a real fascist state in America in 2012 for Israel, under a loony right wing fruit cake.)

The second problem with asking Paterson to step out of the race to save Democratic majorities in Congress is that Obama has them already, in lopsided amounts, and he’s not doing a damn thing with them. Instead of kicking some butt to line his own caucuses up and forcing them to pass some real serious legislation that the president demands (see Bush, George W, for illustration. Also, Reagan, Ronald W.; Johnson, Lyndon B.; and Roosevelt, Franklin R.), this fool is doing deals with Republicans who are trying to destroy him, and the very predatory industries that are precisely the problem with American healthcare. I guess he must think that the GOP is just kidding. You know, like they were with Clinton. In any case, why worry about maintaining your majority if you have no intention of ever actually using it?

(In total agreement prof............could be to do with his age, inexperience...his feeling his way around in his new job, his racial background, dare I say it too dazed and grateful for being in the Whitehouse as a black guy. He really needs to implement his programs quickly, soon is not soon enough.......reverse the tax cuts to the rich; health care reform; Education reform and investment; Reform of the financial market; reform of the Byzantine American local and federal tax system; Immigration reform; pull troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan; get a grip on the REAL security budget of America, and cut it; Reform fundamentally the open free trade system of America....do you have something crap and third rate to sell? Then why not sell it to America?; Provides incentives for industry; reform the American media which is now effectively controlled by a few highly biased oligarchies linked to Jews; roll back the security police state instituted under Bush II....)

And the last reason that Obama is idiotic for meddling in state and local politics is because he was sent to Washington to save the country from the sixteen or so serious crises his predecessor bequeathed him, and about all he has going for him is the good will of the public who gave him the job. Spending your time dicking around with who should be the Democratic Party’s nominee for municipal dog-catcher is not exactly what people had in mind when they gave him this mandate. By going to Europe to beg for the Olympics, or by immersing himself in local politics, this chump is spending his political capital at a furious pace. It wouldn’t even be worth the effort if he was getting what he was asking for. But of course it’s far worse that both Paterson and the IOC slammed the door in his face, as publicly and as emphatically as imaginable. If Obama taped a “kick me” sign to his back, he could hardly signal any better his ineptitude and his willingness to get rolled at every conceivable opportunity.

(inexperience and his team?)

There’s more, of course. Another headline reports that “Panel Finishes Work on Health Bill Amendments”. The public option, already a weak sister to any real reform of the predatory wealth extraction system masquerading as national healthcare, was of course voted down by the Senate Finance Committee referred to in the title. Obama has yet to seriously weigh in on any preferences he might have. Apparently he is going to wait until the end of the legislation process. Assuming that he actually has any preferences – and I don’t, unless you count carrying water for corporate power and Wall Street – how astonishingly stupid is that as a strategy? After all the grief and months of effort Congress has gone through to maybe produce a bill, is it conceivable that they’d want to entertain some major new change at the last minute?

Then there’s Afghanistan, where the president has his own general running around painting him into a policy corner with only one option. Any military guy who tried that under Bush got summarily cashiered, even though they were actually telling the truth. You know, like maybe 160,000 GIs weren’t gonna be sufficient to occupy a country of 25 million pissed-off Iraqis. Say that and your career was over, Shinseki-style.

(Yes he needs to be more assertive with the military, and not be overawed by them. Either he cuts the military ops in Afghanistan and Iraq, which gives him loose change to finance his domestic programs....which avoids a recession.....which gives him a chance to be reelected in 2012, and not do badly in 2010......OR.....he substantively or wholly continues with BUSH II policies with marginal teflon tinkering on the periphery...with outlandish public debates dominated by "FUCK THE NEWS".....to give the impression he is actually doing something, when he actually is NOT)

Is anyone else sensing a pattern here?

(The "pattern' will be more patently obvious after the mid-term election results in 2010, and legislatively what he has actually achieved by then)

Obama would make a great nineteenth century president. You know, all those guys with names you can never remember, because they pretty much didn’t really do anything? Back in those days, Congress was king, and presidents – except during wartime – were essentially glorified clerks, executing the Congressional will, as per their Constitutional duty. That’s certainly one way to do it. It’s just that it pretty much isn’t what people have come to want and expect for the last century or so. And it sure as hell isn’t what Obama promised in the election.

(he would look out of place as a "nigger".........Seriously prof. the "decline" in the American constitutional set-up...over 100 years...distinctly beginning with Crypto-Jew Teddy Roosevelt embarking on the American quest for empire from 1898, and the subsequent inevitable road to imperial presidencies can't be blamed on Obama surely. Obama can chip away against that in his little way by disengaging from Afghanistan and Iraq, which he has the authority and choice to do)

But he has really specialized in being an acted-upon object, rather than a political protagonist, despite possessing the most powerful position in the world, commanding majorities in Congress, an initially adoring public wishing him tons of good will, and all manner of crises to warrant if not demand bold action. In his reticence he is not only carrying forward a fine Democratic Party tradition of recent decades, but in fact refining it into an art form. The pattern works like this: Republicans charge like bulls through china shops and grab the mantle of power, proceeding then to ram their program through, no matter the casualties. When they reach levels of greed, corruption and failure so excessive that even comatose Americans can no longer stand it, some effete Democratic stooge named Carter or Clinton or Obama is called in to hold down the fort long enough for the regressives to regroup and start the cycle again. But Obama in action – better rendered as ‘Obama’s inaction’ – makes Clinton look like a litter full of Mike Tysons crammed into an overheated pressure chamber by comparison.

(Beautiful......Democrats Presidents are angels hey? Carter.......Toppled the Shah of Iran 1979, and what the human cost for Iran has been since; began funding Islamic fundies in Afghanistan via Pakistan from July 1979; Toppled the democratically elected Bhutto regime in Pakistan 1977; sanctioned mass slaughter in South Korea in 1980, under/through military rule; South America I'm sure he did some nasty unsavory things there too..........Clinton.....Iraq/sanctions 500,000 children dead; Kosovo.......)

It’s astonishing how Democrats can never seem to block anything the hard-right wants to do, even when they have majorities, while the GOP kills everything the Democrats supposedly want, even with minuscule minorities in Congress. Gee, one could almost get the impression that Democrats don’t really want anything much different from Republicans, but just have to adopt a different alt-persona to hide their intentions from the public. Republicans use guns, god, gays and Gaddafi as distractions from corporate looting. Democrats strap on their cardigan sweaters and try really, really hard to do something, but gosh-darned it, just never seem to get anywhere.

(Reduced to its basic terms the two American parties are run by Jews which are used to ridicule and fool gentile Americans into thinking that they have a real choice, and a measure of say in the running of their country........which is not the case. In that sense the right/left political paradigm over which the professor is fuming about is non existent/fake/pied piper bullshit......is illusion....the only political paradigm which matters in America is the Jewish one, and the needs of Israel....when that reality hits gentile Americans, there will be revolution, and hence the instituting of the American security police state under Bush.......which Obama has not touched, or talked about rolling back/addressing....not one Congress sub-committee has touched that very important area....simple question you know, do Americans want to live in a Jew run security police state or not?)

As for our friend Mr. Obama, he seems busy unlearning every lesson of the last three decades. He doesn’t appear worried that the right will challenge his legitimacy as president ‘cause, of course, they never did that to Carter or Clinton. He doesn’t seem worried that they’ll happily destroy the country if necessary in order to wreck his presidency because, of course, there’s little precedent for that. He doesn’t much care to use the bully pulpit and strong-arm Congress to get what he wants because, of course, that never got Reagan or Bush anywhere.

(Jews operating in the Republican and Democratic party, in Wall Street, in the media could wreck the USA if they are allowed to..........They almost destroyed the $ in August/September 2008 before the emergency team in the BUSH II administration stepped in..........not many Americans are aware of this episode.The Democrats also play a vital enabler role to so called Republican bad guys.....its a elaborate Jew run double act/vaudeville )

I can’t believe I’d ever say this, but the question Obama should be asking right about now, is “What would Bush do?”

I’ll tell ya what. He’d jam his legislation down the throats of the other party, putting the fear of god in them if they dared to oppose the emperor. He’s rip people’s lungs out and stuff them back through their eye sockets if they looked at him cross-eyed. He’d lie to members of his own party and carpet bomb their entire home neighborhoods if they dared vote against him. If any media talking head didn’t tell the lies they were programmed to speak, he’d kidnap their kids and send them to Gitmo, treating them a good waterboarding for every one of their birthdays. And, he’d call in Rove to stomp some people good, the nice Republican way.

(Surely professor you are not seriously suggesting that the Barack Obama administration adopt the style and fashion of the criminally inept administration of Bush II;Katrina and all that; one of the worst in American history...........Having pure political convictions which have evolved over years of meditation and self learning, AND the requisite personal zeal to implement them onto the nation is one thing; working through the correct legal channels, and constitutional channels....HOWEVER using FALSE FLAG OPS IN AMERICA, and Mafia style MO in all areas to institute ones fundamental political objectives in the service of Likud Israel must be deemed ultimately as political "failure" and a moral "failure")

What would that look like? Here’s journalist Ron Suskind relating an inside taste of what he observed while waiting outside the Ol’ Karl’s office for an interview, back when he was running the White House political operation: “Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. ‘We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!’ As a reporter, you get around—curse words, anger, passionate intensity are not notable events—but the ferocity, the bellicosity, the violent imputations were, well, shocking. This went on without a break for a minute or two. Then the aide slipped out looking a bit ashen, and Rove, his face ruddy from the exertions of the past few moments, looked at me and smiled a gentle, Clarence-the-Angel smile. ‘Come on in.’ And I did. And we had the most amiable chat for a half hour.”

(Yes I think American popular culture has glorified the MAFIA somewhat. When you are running a vast sophisticated 21st century modern country, working through the accepted channels is the best and only option...........if the actions of the Bush administration is exposed as criminal, then Rove would be termed a failure, and not an object lesson on how to get things done.)

Why won’t Obama do this? Why won’t he unleash all the powers at his disposal, knock heads together, and smash political opponents to smithereens in order to get his way? Two reasons. First, he wasn’t a complete personal screw-up for the last half century, acknowledged even by his own parents to be a total embarrassment. He therefore doesn’t have the burning need to show the world they’ve been wrong about him his whole life, like a certain other fellow recently seen roaming the halls of the West Wing.

The other reason is that Obama doesn’t actually appear to be doing anything that requires any particular toughness. He’s not trying to sell a bullshit war or dismantle Social Security, like Bush. He’s not trying to end legal and institutional racism in a country where it was as pervasive as bibles in ‘Bama, like Lyndon Johnson did. He’s not attempting to bring the country kicking and screaming into the twentieth century, even after it was already one-third over, like FDR was.

In fact, he doesn’t really appear to be doing much of anything, including producing the much-vaunted ‘change’ we heard endlessly about during last year’s campaign. Unless, of course, you count the nice demeanor with which he continues the predatory policies of Reagan, Clinton, and the Bushes. This is essentially George W. Bush’s third term. It’s Barry in the Bush with Smiles.

Obama more or less just seems to want to hang for a while, passively swaying in whatever winds happen to be blowing through at the moment. That might have worked in the 1950s, or even the 1970s, but not today. The brownshirts of the American right have been playing for keeps for some time now. And, while it’s true that they can be their own worst enemy in normal times, these are hardly normal times. Failing to address the real economic pain people are feeling, failing to provide remotely meaningful healthcare reform, failing to clean-up the corporate predators slamming the public with bad mortgages, sky-high credit card interest rates and bailouts of the already rich – all of these are an invitation for some change Obama can believe in, especially in 2012. If he insists on being a political object, the right will gladly turn him into one. It will be a freakin’ anvil too, not the fifth face on Mount Rushmore.

This is not kid’s stuff. These mobsters are possessed of insatiable greed, and they are clever beyond belief at mobilizing the anxieties and inadequacies of a public already dumbed-down to a level of political immaturity that can barely keep pace with the amped-up fires of their personal rage to which it’s dangerously coupled. How many re-run episodes of this mini-series do we need to see before we get clear on how it turns out?

The right is wrong on nearly everything, of course – the elites because they lie, and the shock troops because they’re frightened of their own shadows and therefore find blessed relief in every possible palliative from the pope to Palin. But they are correct about Obama being a complete patsy. They like to bring that up in the foreign policy context, because it’s good for scaring voters, and because it doesn’t remind moderates of just who is actually rolling this punk here at home (a very fine example of which was provided by the cheers that went up from our nice super-patriots when America lost the Olympics bid). But the truth is that a movement that should have been discredited to the point of annihilation by its very own actions is now instead setting the agenda in Washington, and the guy who won the landslide seems busy trying to push the mud back up the hill so that he can be buried by it himself, instead of the people who pretty much literally want to kill him.

(Yes, agreed Obama will need to make his choices soon, and quickly..........being a passive night watchman, who achieved very little, where he could have otherwise with executive ease, will be an inglorious legacy for him which will haunt him for the rest of his life. He simply cannot run America with defacto 4 more years of BUSH II policies. Either he challenges these policies FUNDAMENTALLY, as a Democrat with radical political roots, or he faces the consequences from 2010....and then into 2012 .)

I really don’t know what to say or think about this dude anymore. The way democracy is supposed to work is that his desire to hold office and the public’s preference for certain policies should reinforce each other and impel us toward a mutually satisfying presidency. Instead, though, he trucks along seemingly oblivious to the fact that the exact opposite is occurring.

This country is sinking in every way imaginable, and he will be held to blame in 2010 and 2012.

And so he should be.

It’s just that that will also mean the return of the monster set, absolutely foaming at the mouth after four years in the wilderness not holding the presidency to which they believe they’re fully entitled to own.

And then Obama will join Clinton, running around the world making speeches and writing books. Maybe they’ll even do joint appearances.

Errrum no! Clinton despite the Jewish organized blowjob, ran a two term presidency, where the economy did very well, with good employment rates........Barack Hussain Obama on the other hand, if the economy tanks during his watch, serving just one term will not be forgiven by the majority of American public, with large numbers unemployed................then he will be reminded of his Muslim name, birth certificate, and racial background in very nasty unkind terms......he will disappear from the limelight naturally, into Chicago maybe if they have him back, or Hawaii, or Indonesia, or Kenya.............exceptionally high hopes have been raised in the American public, and he must deliver....or else......The security acts passed under Bush weren't instituted to fight "al-Qaeda" prof. if you know what I mean......The security legislation instituted in America by Bush II aren't being used against "al-Qaeda" on a adaily basis)

Thanks for that, Barack. You’re a real patriot.

Oh well. At least you got the important stuff right.

You won’t have ruffled any feathers while being president.

_________________________

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York. He is delighted to receive readers' reactions to his articles (dmg@regressiveantidote.net), but regrets that time constraints do not always allow him to respond. More of his work can be found at his website, www.regressiveantidote.net.

Its not a question of mere honor; Its a question of national survival.

.
.
.
.
My blog covers countless articles about Pakistan for obvious reasons............the country is in a critical situation, and I want to express my perspective to the people, especially government officers, because I have genuine feelings for the welfare of the country, sometimes expressed in colorful terms, sometimes in more measured tones.........And so I am concerned, but not in a voyeuristic vitriolic way.

.
I am also concerned about Pakistan because it is an integral part of South Asia. What happens in Pakistan ultimately affects ALL South Asia.
.
The fundamental problem of Pakistan is the Pakistan military...........in fact the fundamental problem of many Third World countries are their military......Indonesia for example, Bangladesh, Myanmar, USA....and soon.
.
This does not mean that somehow civilian politicians are significantly and starkly better in Pakistan, but because of their power base, civilian politicians are more responsive to the needs of the ordinary people, and therefore the country, then the military men.
.
The top echelons of the Pakistan military are trained and indoctrinated in the USA/UK, and so their perspectives on all matters tend to be from the perspectives and LANGUAGE of the USA/UK. In short they act as proxies of the USA/UK knowingly, or subconsciously through their military indoctrination in those countries.
.
So in very basic terms, civilian politicians are beholden to the people generally, and military men to Western geostrategic interests.
.
So Zardari bhai is responsive to the needs of the Pakistani people?
.
Zardari bhai unlike MA Jinnah, LA Khan, ZA Bhutto, S Mujib and Nawaz Sharif is an "unique" case........he is a pure unadulterated criminal whose only goal in life is to make as much money as possible by robbing the public purse and foreign aid, which is why Western powers were happy to murder his wife, and put him in power...........for them he is an "improvement" on MOSSAD Busharaf.
.
The West needs failed destabilized societies in order for them to "save" them, as with Afghanistan, and Iraq; two countries which are still failed and destabilized under the Wests control.
.
That is why Zardari bhai needs to be removed asap through impeachment/treason proceedings, where proof is provided that he is acting on the orders of Washington, directly..........or corruption charges......or a vote of no confidence in parliament.....The USA will in the course of such action protect him.....and that should further weaken his dwindling political base in Pakistan, so that he starts planning to move to his mansion in Surrey.........the great Pakistani nation, battered and bruised by their trials of history should not dwell on his "rule" any longer.....its an insult to the national IZZAT.
.
Let me expand in summary why I think the PAKISTAN MILITARY is the primary threat and destabilizing force within Pakistan. The USA/UK are gora Christian countries on the other side of the world, run by dastardly demonic Jews, waxing lyrical about saving the world from the perils of "al-Qaeda" and the "Taliban", whilst making huge opium profits in the process, strutting around all self-righteous, lecturing all in sundry about virtue, truth and democracy, whilst in addition managing to make the lives of tens of millions in the Third World miserable............there is a limit to the extent of engaging, "understanding", and rationalizing with such a beast.
.
The priority for Pakistan is to understand the MAIN PROBLEM WITHIN PAKISTAN..........The main problem within Pakistan is the PAKISTAN MILITARY; always has been. An informed Pakistani lady (usually always is) wrote an extensive book in the 1980's around this topic, which I briefly read about in The Times book review section (author Shareen Mazari????)....for some peculiar reason most Pakistani men think the Pakistan military is the greatest military in the world, and number one asset in the country:
.
1. It is possible that sections of the Pakistan military killed LA Khan, depriving the country of a capable seasoned politician in 1951. Certainly not an aggrieved lone gunman,acting on his own. Reasons offered for his murder.....vary.....the military through British direction (UK established the ISI in 1948) wanted to take power, and indeed General Ayub Khan confirmed that he was approached by a clique in 1954 to declare Marshal Law. The other reason is that sections of the military wanted to continue the war with India over Kashmir, an ambition which LA Khan curtailed.
.
2. It is the Pakistan military through the direction of the UK, and USA to an extent which destabilizes Pakistan civilian rule between 1951---58.
.
3. 1954...The Pakistan military operating in the background sign a friendship Treaty with the USA......with extensive encouragement from the UK. General Ayub Khan is actively involved in the negotiations.......and thus through this aid, and political alignment, with American spy bases in the NWFP (U2), America, Jewish America enters Pakistani politics for the first time which will have fateful consequences for the country. Foreign aid from powerful First World countries always comes with strings attached, and is not a case of "here's our aid, you guys do what you like with it". The best policy is not to take any foreign aid in the first place and then suffer the humiliation of lectures and interference from foreign hostile alien powers run by mad Jews. Most of the $1 billion aid was military aid....so we know that from this very fact it is the Pakistani military who took the lead in the negotiations.
.
4. The Pakistan military formally take overpower in 1958, in tandem with the coups in Syria and Iraq.....and the American occupation of Lebanon in 1958.
.
5. The Pakistan military using their American equipment started a war against India in 1965. Modern mechanized mass warfare requires a lot of spares, and the Americans mindful of the use of their equipment in the "wrong" theater supplied only one weeks of spares (another good reason not to rely on foreign military aid and arms....Pakistan/India).........but our little Napoleon geniuses in the Pakistan military committed themselves to war, against larger more powerful India, with only one weeks of spares, thinking they could both WIN the whole of Kashmir, and HOLD, Kashmir against India, with one weeks worth of spares.
.
The greatest fallacy and thinking within the Pakistan military is that just by being Muslims they are somehow substantially better fighters than the humble passive Indian......WRONG! A chamar from the Pooooonjab who converts to Islam, and changes his name from Lalu Chand Chamar to Shah Bahadur Khan Chisti is still wholly and substantially a chamar in all but name ( a chamar is always a chamar), he does not change his race, to a Pashtun, Persian or a Uzbek from Central Asia........the people who substantially constituted Turkic/Mughal rule in North India circa 1100 AD------1800.
.
When a nation commits to war, it also exposes itself to its inherent weaknesses and contradictions. This rule applies to both First World countries and Third World countries alike. Russia 1917. Argentina 1982. This is the sound reason why nations avoid war at all costs. The 1965 war exposed the tensions within Pakistani society, and especially between East Pakistan and West Pakistan. It is only from 1965, after the war that East Pakistanis seriously start thinking about the "differences" between the two wings and the inequalities, and how East Pakistanis could assert greater control over their country. India fully mindful of this sentiment in East Pakistan funded a separatist movement from 1969, after RAW is created in 1968.
.
Also during a war you find out who is your true friend or otherwise. The USA slapped an arms embargo against Pakistan, making the Pakistan military machine completely impotent.....and began destabilizing the Ayub regime from that year. India could have marched into Lahore unopposed, as well as the whole of East Pakistan if it chose to do so, but for the pressure of the USA.
.
6. For all the talk of blaming ZA Bhutto and S Mujib Rahman for the tragedy of 1971, ULTIMATELY it is the Pakistan military which made the key decisions, upon which they conducted an evil genocidal war against their own people for 9 months from 25th March 1971 to 16th December 1971.....hopefully a war crimes referral in the near future at the Hague. 3,000,000 dead according to the Bangladesh authorities, and 300,000 women raped...........not even the Evil British empire committed such crimes in Bengal.......at most they killed people through mass starvation. The destruction of the infrastructure of the country, and the killing of 250 of the best of the country in 13th December 1971, on the eve of surrender.........So the country is divided because of the key decisions and actions of the PAKISTAN MILITARY......43% of the economy and 56% of the population is lost; the Pakistan military suffers its worst defeat/loss of national prestige........10,000 Pakistan soldiers are killed and 93,000 are POW's.......Bhutto goes to India cap in hand to beg India to hand over the POW's.
.
7. General Zia of the Pakistan military the man who was actively involved in the suppression of the Palestinian uprising in 1970, serving as Brigadier in a proxy colonial force in Jordan. He was made C & C of the Pakistani armed forces by ZA Bhutto, as a trusted man. There is in human nature such a thing as gratitude and loyalty to ones country and leader (basic animal group behavior------- .....observe wolf packs, ..........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKpZUsRJWBg">chimp's in groups, ....or ants even, you fucking bhen chauds), but for a Chamar Chamcha Chaud from the Pooooooooonjab this general human basic "quality" does not apply.
.
So in 1977, the military Chaud acting on the orders of the USA illegally takes power in Pakistan, and then kills his former mentor and benefactor; based on fake charges,..... no expulsion into foreign shores, or simple imprisonment, or house arrest.........no moral remorse or leeway.
.
Bhutto's crime was that he was standing up for his country, and giving assertive speeches along the lines........"We will eat grass if we have to until we get the nuke bomb.".......this alarmed the Jews......and they sent Henry Kissinger first, and then later the Pakistan military to enforce their writ.......you kill Bhutto, a democratically elected President, and you kill the Pakistan nuke bomb, so the Jew thinking went. Bhutto was of course playing to the gallery, as a populist Third World leader, reflecting popular public sentiment.......that is all......he certainly wasn't making any nuke bombs himself, far from it.
.
More significantly, the actions of the MILITARY chamar chaud back in 1977 set a far far dangerous precedent, which has had a fundamental impact on Pakistan's national politics ever since. The precedent and unspoken rule is this. "If you as leader of Pakistan oppose the USA, we'll kill ya, and replace you, and we can rely on the Pakistan military to do it for us, CONVERSELY, if you slavishly follow our dictates in Washington then you have a better chance of running Pakistan.".........Is it any wonder that Pakistan is a failed state number 9..........where the President visits the American embassy every day. Who is responsible for this? Jews are gangsters.....you give them an inch,they will take a mile, BUT ultimately it is the duty of honest Pakistanis with IZZAT,who must take the responsibility for protecting their nation,family and homes.
.
Chamar Chamcha Chaud Zia and the entire top brass is killed by America, later, when they have served their purpose in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and civilian Benazir Bhutto is bought into power.
.
8. General Zia of the PAKISTAN MILITARY also did one other bad thing from 1977......The Islamisation of Pakistan society. Another Dangerous Pakistan military decision as it moves the national focus away from the key sectors into dead ends. Pakistan does not need more Koran thumping orthodox SUNNI Islam to bind and unite the nation into a successful fruitful modern future, what the country needs is for the military to stay out of power, democracy, good transparent government, a neutral judiciary, anti-corruption, civil society, economic development for all.........industrialization (1.6 millions of annual steel production?)....more exports ($18 billion ha ha ha!)........$30 billion budget only! .....and where anti-state Chamar Chamcha Chauds traitors cease cooperating with Foreign interfering powers who don't have, never have had, the best interests of Pakistan.
.
9. General Zia of the PAKISTAN MILITARY also did one other bad thing, which would have profound consequences for Pakistan and the wider region. .............the funding of hard line Islamic fighters in Afghanistan as a proxy of the Pakistan military, of the most extreme peculiar kind.............Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, over more moderate Afghan resistance forces......Ahmed Shah Masood.This set a trend in the thinking of the Pakistan military.....which culminated in the creation of the Taliban in 1994, with active encouragement from the USA...........and the result is for all to see. The Pakistan military is expending a good deal of its resources and manpower fighting their own created monsters. Why did the Pakistan military think that a triumphant Taliban in Afghanistan would be good for relatively modern neighboring Pakistan......didn't the great Pakistan military strategic planners realize that such an unique neighbor, fixed on a perch in Kabul, would have severe destabilizing effects on Pakistan, as it is now, even though its limited to parts of FATA?
.
In addition SUNNI Islamic fundamentalist groups were also organized by the PAKISTAN MILITARY, within Pakistan which would wage jihad against Shia Pakistanis in various parts of Pakistan........creating a civil war scenario, and against India. For the genius's of the Pakistan military, they did not realize the long term blow back serious consequences of such action......"lets train and arm a few village idiots, and see what happens".....
.
10. From 1988--1999 civilian government, most of it ineffective and unstable. During this period the PAKISTAN MILITARY interfered with the civilian government, or did not depending on the head of the armed forces..........American embassy playing an active role in Pakistan politics, continually.
.
11. MOSSAD Busharaf of the PAKISTAN MILITARY recruited as Israeli agent in the early 1980's, when General Zia let in a lot of Israelis into Pakistan to train the Mujaheddin, with 3 of his fellow generals in 1999, decided in secret to launch a war against India, without telling the rest of the military, OR the civilian head of government...........surely a state crime of some kind. What is the MILITARY objective of the Kargil campaign? NONE............no realistic objective, but the war is a cover to destabilize the civilian government in Islamabad, which then allows the military to come back into power which they did 3 months later, headed by MOSSAD Busharaf, "Hero of Kargil".
.
MOSSAD Busharaf invested the NLI and a few SSG in this great military campaign,numbering 5,000--10,000, against 30,000 Indian soldiers, and 300 artillery. Given the numbers, and type of equipment used in the campaign, there clearly was no intention by Mossad Busharaf of winning the Kargil military campaign, otherwise he would have invested more men or resources into it from the regular forces, and not just paramilitary (unofficially Pakistan has 800,000 men in the military, and 300,000 in the paramilitary)......you'd think hey. Consequently the NLI are slaughtered by the regular Indian military opposing them,who are better armed and trained.....4,000 dead on the Pakistani side, against about 600 Indian casualties...and for many weeks the Pakistan military does not claim the war dead as theirs; MOSSAD Busharaf apparently busy playing golf according to reliable sources.....which is disgraceful, but typical of Poonjabi Chamar Chamcha Chaud behavior............one notes the ease with which MOSSAD Busharafs regime (1999---2008), used violence as a tool of state policy.......another pure criminal and traitor, hoping to come back to power when Zardari's government eventually collapses.
.
The PAKISTAN MILITARY tried the same trick recently, when they set up the Swat Taliban replete with uninterrupted radio station, logistics, and state sanctioned legitimacy (basically the Taliban can set up their own country within Pakistan proper, with its own law, with the tacit approval and support of the PAKISTAN MILITARY in the background) to destabilize and threaten the Zardari government, close to Islamabad recently in 2009..........so that/justification...."The Pakistan military needs to take over Pakistan and declare marshal law, to protect Pakistan from a Taliban takeover"...........another dangerous game by the PAKISTAN MILITARY. ............a folly Scotched by Washington, when they "ORDER" the PAKISTAN MILITARY to be more vigorous in fighting the Taliban or else.
.
12. But perhaps the most dangerous legacy and action of the Pakistan military is the creation of the "al-Qaeda" myth with the tacit covert guidance from Washington. When the Pakistan military fucked up and miscalculated in the 1965 war, all that happened was that they licked their wounds,and went back to their barracks. In 1971, they lost 56% of the population and 43% of economy, so they conceded power to the civilian government, licked their wounds, recovered their 93,000 POW's and stayed in the background for 5 years. When they lost the 1999 Kargil war, they blamed the loss on the civilian government, destabilized it, and took power within 3 months.......
.
.......BUT by creating the "al-Qaeda" hologram for America/Israel, and sustaining it (just last week the Pakistan military announced that they were launching an attack against a compound in NWFP which may house Bin Laden,the long dead "leader"of "al-Qaeda" ) is a whole new dangerous scenario and game which the PAKISTAN MILITARY are yet again playing, which can have dire consequences for Pakistan in the future, and which is slowly building up around Pakistan........Pakistan is quite often now called the most dangerous nation on earth; terrorist hub number one, by very important people in Washington, London and other important countries............the logical progression of such a narrative is an attack in the future against Pakistan, comprehensively by America and her allies. This narrative has been critically assisted, AGAINST PAKISTAN'S INTEREST, by the PAKISTAN MILITARY. (please can some one explain to me how Pakistan benefits from being imaged globally as a terrorist hub number one, which is then attacked by the USA.......back to the stone age).....this is the last most dangerous legacy of the PAKISTAN MILITARY to the Pakistan people......the most traitorous deed in the service of Israel/Washington for the sake of friendship, and foreign aid.
.
13. Civilians governments in Pakistan are not paradigms of virtue and good governance, but the thing is with civilian governments they don't generally make MONUMENTAL MISTAKES WHICH HAVE DIRE CONSEQUENCES FOR THE NATION IMMEDIATELY OR A COUPLE YEARS LATER.......as is the case with the PAKISTAN MILITARY governance.

____________________________________

Has Pakistan lost its honor (The Pakistan military never had any in the first place) by The London Telegraph, Dean Nelson.

A fascinating article in Pakistans The News newspaper by A.Q Khan, who as the creator of its nuclear weapon capability is the source of much of his countrys military pride, but is the cause of great suspicion in the West for his role in helping states like North Korea and Iran develop their nuclear programmes.

(Iran's been under nuclear sanctions for quite a while, and so in order to develop its civilian nuclear industry it has had to approach rather dubious sources sometimes, such as AQ Khan's "supermarket for nukes" network...........but there should not be any guilt by simple association. We do understand that they have allowed IAEA inspectors into Iran since 2003, and have clearly and repeatedly declared that they are opposed to nuclear weapons........and various international expert sources have verified this fact as much........however North Korea on the other hand....)

.
In his article he appears to suggest Pakistan has lost its ‘ghairat’, its honour.
He doesn’t explicitly state the grounds, but many of his readers will have their own examples and case studies to back up his argument.

.
Predator drone attacks are launched by the United States into Pakistan territory despite protests from its ministers, its army launches attacks on militants they themselves have trained to fight in India and Afghanistan, and President Obama’s Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke comes and goes as he pleases to tell its president and prime minister what they should do.

.
For this Mr Holbrooke is known as Pakistan’s ‘Viceroy’, while in proud India his plans to visit are occasionally rejected to remind him who calls the shots in the sub-continent.

.
Now, the Kerry-Lugar Bill in the United States will give Pakistan $1.5 billion per year in aid, but require its leaders to sign an annual audit to confirm they have met American demands on tackling terrorism.

(This is a perfectly logical demand by Congress given that Pakistan along the corruption index is way up there,and recession hit America in further bloating its unsustainable empire needs to know where all the moola is going)

.
In President Musharraf’s biography In the Line of Fire, the retired General gives an extraordinary insight into his country’s relationship with the United States, recounting how on the day after the September 11 attacks, U.S Secretary of State Colin Powell summoned him from a meeting to take a phone call and told him:

.“You’re either with us or against us.” The following day, he said, his intelligence chief was told by Colin Powell’s deputy, Richard Armitage, that Pakistan was “either with America or with the terrorists, but that if we were with the terrorists we should be prepared to be bombed back to the Stone Age.”
.

Pakistan’s relationship with the Taliban and al-Qaeda has, like that of the United States, been historically complicated, but mainly because it was fulfilling Washington’s anti-Soviet foreign policy goals in Afghanistan.

.
The United States obviously needed to respond to the frontal attack of 9/11 and needed to know who its friends were. But can a friend be spoken to like that and retain any sense of honour?

______________________________________


http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/09/bhai-saab-pakistan-isnt-iraq-under.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/05/de-coupling-from-usa-strategy.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/05/is-this-going-to-be-another-vietnam.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/urgent-de-construction-of-al-qaeda-myth.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/old-problem-of-twisted-logic.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/dangerous-double-game-by-pakistan.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/fiddling-whilst-pakistan-burns.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/dangerous-traitorous-game-by-pakistan.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/blog-post.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/99-of-pakistani-people-vs-anglocised.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/so-sad-but-no-great-surprise.html

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/04/major-paradigm-shift-in-policy-from.html

____________________________________________


What Pakistanis must do, for the sake of national survival:

• Close ALL American military bases in Pakistan.
  
• Reject ALL foreign military advisers in Pakistan
  
• Close ALL foreign intelligence activity in Pakistan
  
• Reject and resist any missiles attacks or incursions by Western soldiers into sovereign Pakistan territory.
  
• Stop taking security aid which indebted Pakistan to Washington's policies.
  
• Through the MSM in Pakistan...Geo news, Dawn, PTV etc state to all Pakistanis that OBL is dead, and that he may have died in 2001.
  
• Tell the Pakistani people through the MSM that "al-Qaeda" is a fake organization that never existed..............tell them clearly and comprehensively. Then the people will be able to understand the real situation in Pakistan and make better assessment of who exactly is fighting who. There is no greater asset than taking the general people into your confidence. The American narrative must be debunked in relation to Afghanistan/Pakistan, and only then can American policies can be debunked in the region also. The Pakistani military at the very least should not sustain American lies.
  
• Reject Holbrooke the Jew, the "peacemaker of the Balkans" as a mediator for Pakistan/Afghan affairs. His only duty and job is to facilitate and legitimate failed states such as Bosnia, and Kosovo.
  

In doing these things Washington may impose sanctions against Pakistan; America certainly is not in a position to militarily attack Pakistan as it was in 2001, and threatened to do so..."Bomb ya back to the stone age.....". Also the Obama administration "enlightened" by 8 years of the previous administration is not internationally irresponsible as Bush II...........so the worse that can happen is the cutting off of some aid by Washington.........which Pakistan can respond to by blocking the supplies of logistics and materials going to the occupation forces in Afghanistan.

.

One is not suggesting Pakistan becomes a pseudo anti-American power like mullah Iran, with the attendant unnecessary theatrics and rhetoric for the benefit of the USA and global public, BUT Pakistan must ultimately pursue its own interests for the sake of national survival, rather than acting as now as a basic appendage to USA geo-strategy......which patently is harming and destabilizing Pakistan.

Common sense and sober assessment vs rabid paranioc hysteria.

.
.
.
.
This is yet another sober assessment by Professor Juan Cole about Iran, and its real situation and intentions, as a pose to the propaganda and hype that is often offered by the Western media about mullah Iran.

But there are also fundamental flaws in his assessment about Iran, which he fails to address. Fundamental concerns about Iran which he fails to address. This leaves the door open to the lynch mobs of public hysteria to attack Iran further; American policy against Iran has been as much about emotion as it has been about basic common sense, and what is in the best interests of America over the contentious issue of mullah Iran.

In trying to understand Iran, and from an American perspective build a working relationship, we must first find out how the mullah regime came about in the first place, in 1979, and then figure out from there, critically, what is the real rationale and policies of the mullah regime beyond the public rhetoric at Fridays prayers and other venues, the understanding of which holistically can be used to engage Iran more meaningfully, and for the best interests of America.

The mullahs were installed by the USA/UK:

http://www.netnative.com/news/06/mar/1090.html

Working closely with France:

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2008/07/reality-of-british-puppets.html

For what purpose I can only speculate:

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2007/12/mullah-puppets-of-zion.html

Israel was also most likely involved.
.

What we can be sure about is that the mullahs were installed to subvert Iran, pull Iranian society backwards, and de-legitimate Iran in the eyes of the international community, ......and the Iranian regime certainly has done a good job in that department.

If we accept this basic premise and "understand" where its coming from in terms of its true origin, then engaging the country can be more effective. That is not to say that the mullahs should be permanently legitimated as rightful rulers of Iran; one wishes to see the mullah regime disappear from the page of history sooner or later, HOWEVER, what one does not want is a wholly unnecessary attack and subsequent war against Iran which is open ended just like Iraq and Afghanistan, based on false information and assumptions, which suits the fruitcake warmongers in Israel.
.
America can "manage" to a certain extent mullah Iran if the USA is flexible and imaginative...........relations between the two countries can grow, without compromising American interests in the wider Middle East. You can influence the course of policy within the country far more effectively if American has diplomatic relations with a country, then you can from a great distance (e.g. Pakistan, and the huge embassy being built there soon) Certainly its high time a new track is applied by America over mullah puppet Iran.
_______________________________________________


Informed Comment
Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion
By Professor Juan Cole, President of the Global Americana Institute

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Top Things you Think You Know about Iran that are not True:

.

Thursday is a fateful day for the world, as the US, other members of the United Nations Security Council, and Germany meet in Geneva with Iran in a bid to resolve outstanding issues. Although Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had earlier attempted to put the nuclear issue off the bargaining table, this rhetorical flourish was a mere opening gambit and nuclear issues will certainly dominate the talks. As Henry Kissinger pointed out, these talks are just beginning and highly unlikely that there will be any breakthroughs for a very long time. Diplomacy is a marathon, not a sprint.
.

But on this occasion, I thought I'd take the opportunity to list some things that people tend to think they know about Iran, but for which the evidence is shaky.
.

Belief: Iran is aggressive and has threatened to attack Israel, its neighbors or the US.

.

Reality: Iran has not launched an aggressive war modern history (unlike the US or Israel), and its leaders have a doctrine of "no first strike." This is true of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, as well as of Revolutionary Guards commanders.

.

(There is rhetorical hostility towards the USA, with rent-a-demonstrations, walking over American flags, burning American flags, America is the "Great Satan" slogan...and soon and soon, SO/BUT there is political rhetoric and then there is real state intentions.
.

Chris Patten a British minister can be called the son of a whore by a certain state very publicly, and then he can just as easily next day sit with his exotic name callers, all smiles and handshakes, and continue with the serious business of state to state negotiations which benefit both countries.........or British diplomats in the presence of wife/children being beaten up by over zealous Revolutionary Guards personnel in Tehran, and yet in a short time relations between the two nations are back to normal.....business as usual.
.

The thing is not to take ones queue about Iran from the American media, work one self up about it unnecessarily, which then leads American foreign policy, but rather take a calm sober, circumspect views of Iran......and think in terms of how to manage Iran in the best interests of America..........rather than huffing and puffing from a good distance, with a dose of threats, which is illegal under international law and not the long term productive answer.

.

AND its not as if the mullahs don't like America........we have had sporadic covert relations between the two countries, since 1979. After all America with Britain, France and possibly Israel originally bought the mullahs into power, and then America got frozen out gradually.........
.

"The October Surprise" on going in 1980,with shuttle meetings between Ahmed, Khomeini's son and other senior revolutionary figures with American officials in Paris and other parts of Europe, secretly.
.

Iran/Contra in the 1980's, with Robert Macfarlane and other Reagan officials presenting cakes to the mullahs in Tehran in 1984/85 .
.

.......the more recent co-operation against Taliban Afghanistan, and Saddam's Iraq; the meetings in Rome of senior Revolutionary Guards officers with American officials between 2001---2003 about "intelligence" sharing about Iraq, organized by the neocon Michael Ladeen.
.

The meeting of Iranian officials with American government officers in the Gulf.....so why not normalize such surreptitious relations some of which are usually illegal, into formal legal negotiations, which everybody can observe, in the public limelight?......Will the world end for America? One thinks not.

.

Iran has tried to formalize relations with America on 3 specific occasions, but was snubbed in all of them:
.

1) 1995, "come and sign oil deals with us"....American response 1996, sanctions along with Arab Libya.
.

2) 2001, "We have helped you in Afghanistan,and we have common interests in the region,so lets work together". American response in January 2002, Iran is part of the "Axis of Evil" along with Iraq and North Korea.
.

3) Finally in 2003, via Switzerland....code number 3 NY/Germany, "We wish formalized negotiated relations with Israel; the cessation of funding for all external resistance groups; full cooperation in terms of Iraq; full cooperation with the nuclear question".......basically everything the Americans could only dream about in getting from Iran.....BUT American response,....after Iraq, its Iran's turn......the road to Tehran is through Iraq...blah..blah...blah.....and other such Cocky talk.

.

Does the State Department have a copy of that 2003 letter?
.

It certainly should not be about getting into a girlie sulk/huff, "nah..nana..nah....naa, I'm not talking to you. Can't hear you......."
.

Belief: Iran is a militarized society bristling with dangerous weapons and a growing threat to world peace.
.

Reality: Iran's military budget is a little over $6 billion annually. Sweden, Singapore and Greece all have larger military budgets. Moreover, Iran is a country of 70 million, so that its per capita spending on defense is tiny compared to these others, since they are much smaller countries with regard to population. Iran spends less per capita on its military than any other country in the Persian Gulf region with the exception of the United Arab Emirates.

.

(Iran will never become a great military power, with an effective conventional offensive potential which threatens the region under the present regime.

.

WHY SO?

.

The mullahs installed by the USA/UK/France distrust the Iranian military and the possibility that they may attempt a coup against the unpopular mullah puppet regime. ...."Noje Coup" attempt in 1980 by 600 plus officers mainly in the airforce,tipped off to the mullah's by Gaddaffi, OR elements in Western intelligence keen to protect the newly installed mullah puppet regime----{basically if you are planning to overthrow the mullah regime don't plan it in a Western country, with the knowledge of Western officials.....remember the vast number of Iranian resistence members who have been killed in Europe....such things don't happen without the approval of local security.......in Paris especially.}.......In addition, just to make sure, the mullahs have periodically culled large numbers of senior military officers within mullah Iran, including Revolutionary Guard commanders in the classic manner of the Soviet purges of the Red army in the 1930's.
.

The Turkish Military have 1 million men under arms working closely with Israhell/USA, and the other neighbor Pakistan has 1.1 million security men under arms working closely with the USA{Jundallah}. Mean while Iran has 420,000 men in the Iranian military, 350,000 army, 50,000 airforce, 20,000 navy.....spending 3% on defence {a nation supposedly about to be attacked by Israel or USA}......200 serviceable jets, 1600 tanks,and 3,000 serviceable artillery......The Russians don't sell them huge quantities of conventional arms but rather piecemeal arms transfers which are usually sold at over inflated prices........which are subsequently hounded down and criticised by Israel/USA.....)
.

Belief: Iran has threatened to attack Israel militarily and to "wipe it off the map."
.

Reality: No Iranian leader in the executive has threatened an aggressive act of war on Israel, since this would contradict the doctrine of 'no first strike' to which the country has adhered. The Iranian president has explicitly said that Iran is not a threat to any country, including Israel.
.

(Mistranslation by MEMRI, DEBKA, and IRNA the later of which is allied to the Rafsanjani camp, and repeated and amplified by the Zionist media as the gospel truth. A mullah regime installed by the USA/UK/France which is fundamentalist Islam isn't going to wipe out the site in Jerusalem where the prophet Mohammed ascended to heaven, and go down in history as the destroyers of that very important site........one of the most holiest sites of Islam, together with 4 million Palestinians.....just ain't going to happen....unless you are a paraniod batshit schizo Jew, who thinks Iran is 6 months away from the nuke bomb for the last 30 years.........search the articles in Israeli newspapers over the last 30 years)
.

Belief: But didn't President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threaten to 'wipe Israel off the map?

.

Reality: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did quote Ayatollah Khomeini to the effect that "this Occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" (in rezhim-e eshghalgar-i Qods bayad as safheh-e ruzgar mahv shavad). This was not a pledge to roll tanks and invade or to launch missiles, however. It is the expression of a hope that the regime {in Tel-a-Viv} will collapse, just as the Soviet Union did. It is not a threat to kill anyone at all.
.

(Ahmedinejad is a pint sized crypto-Jew placed into power to bait and rouse the rabble; the sedative and circus distraction for the Iranian masses to forget about their daily woes under mullah misrule...http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2009/02/ahmedinejad-jew.html but, yes, he was misquoted....he did not say he wanted to wipe Israel off the map)
.

Belief: But aren't Iranians Holocaust deniers?
.

Actuality: Some are, some aren't. Former president Mohammad Khatami has castigated Ahmadinejad for questioning the full extent of the Holocaust, which he called "the crime of Nazism." Many educated Iranians in the regime are perfectly aware of the horrors of the Holocaust. In any case, despite what propagandists imply, neither Holocaust denial (as wicked as that is) nor calling Israel names is the same thing as pledging to attack it militarily.
.

(Really prof. what % of Iranians actually sit at home pondering seriously over the esoteric subject of Israel.........1%...maybe 2%........the most likely topic of concern/worry for the average Iranian is more likely to be the price of food,transport, basic commodities,their wages and salary, work, the economy, the harvest, Afghan and foreign refugees in Iran; education; crime....and perhaps local politics...linked to these subjects)

.

Belief: Iran is like North Korea in having an active nuclear weapons program, and is the same sort of threat to the world.

.

Actuality: Iran has a nuclear enrichment site at Natanz near Isfahan where it says it is trying to produce fuel for future civilian nuclear reactors to generate electricity. All Iranian leaders deny that this site is for weapons production, and the International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly inspected it and found no weapons program. Iran is not being completely transparent, generating some doubts, but all the evidence the IAEA and the CIA can gather points to there not being a weapons program. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by 16 US intelligence agencies, including the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency, assessed with fair confidence that Iran has no nuclear weapons research program. This assessment was based on debriefings of defecting nuclear scientists, as well as on the documents they brought out, in addition to US signals intelligence from Iran. While Germany, Israel and recently the UK intelligence is more suspicious of Iranian intentions, all of them were badly wrong about Iraq's alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction and Germany (intelligence) in particular was taken in by Curveball, a drunk Iraqi braggart.

.

(Well this was politicised intelligence; intelligence to fit the official political narrative of war against Iraq........as described by Sir Richard Dearlove in 2002. Since then maybe with the outcome of Iraq, and Afghanistan, in hindsight a second thought is emerging based on the result of the previous two follies of war..........mullah Iran purely for ideological reasons is not interested in nuclear weapons........in the Gulf war against Saddam, they faced Saddam's chemical weapons for many years without responding with the like for a while......this should tell us something.)

.

Belief: The West recently discovered a secret Iranian nuclear weapons plant in a mountain near Qom.

.

Actuality: Iran announced Monday a week ago to the International Atomic Energy Agency that it had begun work on a second, civilian nuclear enrichment facility near Qom. There are no nuclear materials at the site and it has not gone hot, so technically Iran is not in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, though it did break its word to the IAEA that it would immediately inform the UN of any work on a new facility. Iran has pledged to allow the site to be inspected regularly by the IAEA, and if it honors the pledge, as it largely has at the Natanz plant, then Iran cannot produce nuclear weapons at the site, since that would be detected by the inspectors. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted on Sunday that Iran could not produce nuclear weapons at Natanz precisely because it is being inspected. Yet American hawks have repeatedly demanded a strike on Natanz.
.

Belief: The world should sanction Iran not only because of its nuclear enrichment research program but also because the current regime stole June's presidential election and brutally repressed the subsequent demonstrations.
.

Actuality: Iran's reform movement is dead set against increased sanctions on Iran, which likely would not affect the regime, and would harm ordinary Iranians.

.

(Iranian elections are fixed as they are in many other banana countries.........Ahmedinejad is the circus clown performing for the ruling mullah junta, as a non-mullah, and behind the mullah's, certain European powers "guiding"the country........it is a brutal theocratic dictatorship which mass murdered many people upon coming to power in 1979, and sending 5 million educated middle class Iranians out of the country as refugees; the death of 100,000 Iranians in the great civil war against the Tudeh Communist left alliance during 1981-82; 8 years war against Iraq claiming the lives of 1 million Iranian men and children.....no war against Iraq if the Shah, and the Iranian military intact were still in power; the summary execution of 30,000 Iranian civilians on the panic belief that Saddam would occupy Tehran in 1988; summary and primitive justice for many Iranians since...........Iran is not a democracy in any shape or form...and the Iranian people should struggle alone to over throw this alien imposed puppet regime.........The West is not interested in doing so)
.

Belief: Isn't the Iranian regime irrational and crazed, so that a doctrine of mutally assured destruction just would not work with them?

.

Actuality: Iranian politicians are rational actors. If they were madmen, why haven't they invaded any of their neighbors? Saddam Hussein of Iraq invaded both Iran and Kuwait. Israel invaded its neighbors more than once. In contrast, Iran has not started any wars. Demonizing people by calling them unbalanced is an old propaganda trick. The US elite was once unalterably opposed to China having nuclear science because they believed the Chinese are intrinsically irrational. This kind of talk is a form of racism.

.

Belief: The international community would not have put sanctions on Iran, and would not be so worried, if it were not a gathering nuclear threat.

.

Actuality: The centrifuge technology that Iran is using to enrich uranium is open-ended. In the old days, you could tell which countries might want a nuclear bomb by whether they were building light water reactors (unsuitable for bomb-making) or heavy-water reactors (could be used to make a bomb). But with centrifuges, once you can enrich to 5% to fuel a civilian reactor, you could theoretically feed the material back through many times and enrich to 90% for a bomb. However, as long as centrifuge plants are being actively inspected, they cannot be used to make a bomb. The two danger signals would be if Iran threw out the inspectors or if it found a way to create a secret facility. The latter task would be extremely difficult, however, as demonstrated by the CIA's discovery of the Qom facility construction in 2006 from satellite photos. Nuclear installations, especially centrifuge ones, consume a great deal of water, construction materiel, and so forth, so that constructing one in secret is a tall order. In any case, you can't attack and destroy a country because you have an intuition that they might be doing something illegal. You need some kind of proof. Moreover, Israel, Pakistan and India are all much worse citizens of the globe than Iran, since they refused to sign the NPT and then went for broke to get a bomb; and nothing at all has been done to any of them by the UNSC.

___________________________________

Belief: Iran is the greatest sponsor of global terrorism, and a threat to world peace:

.

Actuality: USA/Israel are the greatest sponsors of global terrorism, used as extentions of covert state policy......mafia style. http://amconmag.com/article/2007/feb/12/00017/ and not forgetting USA/Israel covert activity in South/Central America, Africa, Europe, and Asia.......really where ever America goes covertly, for some reason the Israelis invite themselves along, and the Americans seem to have no problems with that..............but what about "al-Qaeda" and Iran......."al-Qaeda" fictional fake "al-Qaeda" is a hologram front of Western/Israeli intelligence. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fakealqaeda.html but lets all pretend that "al-Qaeda" really does exist...........it is a Sunni fundamentalist organisation,which allegedly butchered Iranian diplomats in Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998, which caused the mullahs to mass 250,000 on the Afghan border....whilst Iran is a SHIA fundamentalist state, which hates "al-Qaeda" with a vengence....they are not going to work together ever.

.

Iran does sponsor, train, arm and finance the Lebanese based Hizbollah with about $100 million a year, which is a SHIA only organisation, representing 40% of Lebanon's population,along with AMAL {America gives terrorist Israel possibly $5 billion a year, with far, far worse consequences for the world}. It is not a terrorist group, but a local national liberation movement that conducts its operations EXCLUSIVELY against military targets within Lebanon, and Israel. Iran does fund Hamas, and other Palestinian groups who seek "self-determination '' within their own country, but it is doubtful whether Shia Iran is in addition extensively arming them to the same level as Hizbollah.....since they are Sunni Islamic fundamentalist groups..........the Palestinians have the right to bear arms and struggle for national liberation, within their own country, under "self-determination" and international law....if they feel that Israel has no sincere desire for peaceful co-existence..........and Iran can legally supply them with arms if the Palestinians so do request such assistence.
.

Belief: Iran is funding and fueling the Iraqi resistence, which has killed approaching 5,000 USA servicemen.

.

Actuality: The main resistance against the hostile American occupation of Iraq for 6 years ongoing is from the SUNNI 20% minority of Iraq who have been traditionally the rulers of Iraq for about 1,300 years, when the Islamic Caliphate was first established. There are 30,000 "bitter enders" fighting the American forces, of which 5% are foreign fighters drawn from Saudi Arabia, Syria, and other Arab countries....often mistakenly labeled as "al-Qaeda"....1,500...in Iraq to protect and fight for the Sunni minority,as much as fight the American occupation forces. America has since attempted to buy many of these Iraqi Sunni fighters under various schemes.

.

Lets put it another way, since the American hostile occupation of Iraq, for the first time in history, for 1,300 years, SHIA rulers are in "control" of the country, and the puppet mullahs in Tehran are to say the least ecstatic about this unique historical occurrence via America's good grace, because two of the holiest sites for SHIA Islam is in Iraq, Karbellah and Najaf, extensively damaged by Saddam......SO it would not be in Iran's interests to destabilize the Iraqi apple cart NOW, but rather assist the Americans in their effort, as the Iranians have repeatedly offered in clear diplomatic channels. Further Iranians have good reasons to hate Saddam, and are to an extent grateful to America in removing Saddam.

.

The American military have made some clumsy presentations which purport to show Iranian involvement in the Iraqi resistence.....but nobody has taken them seriously.

.

Belief: Like Saddam and his WMD programs, and his linkages with "al-Qaeda", and the covert meetings in Prague of the operatives of the two organisations, as stated by non other than Dick Cheney.............Iran in the future after building the nuke bomb just might hand over one such device to "al-Qaeda" which is subsequently exploded in a Western country.

.

Actuality: Whilst SHIA Islam does advocate martyrdom in the battle field fighting ones armed foe conventionally...mano-o-mano, the religion does not specifically call for mass NATIONAL suicide and which does not provide specific strategic benefits for Iran {stated with a straight face given the nature of the topic}.........the puppet mullahs installed by the USA/UK/France, and manipulated by certain European powers from the background ultimately must be RATIONAL to have ruled Iran for 30 years.

.

One also must assume that the mullahs over the years have grown rather fond of ruling Iran, with all the attendant perks {many of them are now billionaires, living above the law}.....so why would they want to throw ALL that away, and kill themselves, and their families, and destroy their country as would happen in any retaliatory attack.

.

All the indications and chatter out of Iran indicates the mullahs are CRAVING LEGITIMACY, AND DIPLOMATIC RECOGNITION FROM THE USA.......and the maintenance of the present status quo within Iran for many more years to come, rather than end it all suddenly for no clear justifiable rational reason...........the peculiar perspectives of schizo-Jews and their butt buddies not withstanding, and their arrogance is dishing out such basic boogie boogie stories to the rest of the gentile poplation.

.

"al-Qaeda" is SUNNI fundamentalist, which allegedly butchered Iranian diplomats in Mazar-i-Sharif in 1998, Northern Afghanistan, causing Iran to mobilise 250,000 troops on the Afghan/Iran border. The mullahs call the Taliban and by implication "al-Qaeda" as "fossilised dinosaurs". In short mullah SHIA Iran hates the "al-Qaeda".

.

There are about 100-200 "al-Qaeda" operatives in Iran, but they are not invited guests living the life of Reilly....most are under house arrest, with very restricted movement. But why are they in SHIA Iran? After the American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 many Arab fighters allied to the Taliban escaped to Pakistan, then back to their countries via Oman, whilst other Arab fighters attempted to reach their country through Iran, especially if they happened to be in the vicinity of Western Afghanistan.....some reached their country of origin, whilst others were caught by Iranian security...............the Afghan/Iranian border is very long and porous.

.

The Iraqi/Saddam/al-Qaeda/WMD/Prague meet-up proved to be a dud, and a fabrication to justfy war against Iraq. When prominent Jewess's and Jewish "experts" and their attendant butt buddy gentiles repeat this mantra ad nauseum in the media, "I'm just so scared the day "al-Qaeda"gets hold of a nuke bomb" without elaborating this simple crass sound bite.........then for sure Western security should be alert to Israel's intentions and modes for justifying endless war in their attempt at trying to achieve Eretz Israel.....by what ever means.

.

6................dead in WTC 1993.

.

169............dead at Oklahoma.1995. http://judicial-inc.biz/Oklahoma_City_Bomb.htm

.

3,000.........dead in the vicinity of the twin towers on 9/11. 2001.

.

10,000---40,000.......dead because of a dirty bomb from "al-Qaeda". 2011.

.

Israel was involved in ALL the above through their local security contacts in the USA.........that created the present security state in the USA, AND which allowed Israel to exert a greater influence over such a security state, AND ensured this security state followed Israel's geo-strategic agenda exclusively.

.

Such evil dastardly things seem to happen/evolve during Democractic party rule,as it is the party which is closer to Israel,and more "Jewish" than the Republican party....80% of Jews vote for the Democractic party traditionally.

.

This particular soundbite is used as a threat by the Jews and their gentile butt buddies,"Do as we say, or else you know what "al-Qaeda"will do."

.

The question is how self respecting gentiles in the West react to such banal obvious public threats.

Military history repeating itself; Vietnam revisited.

.
.
.
.

McChrystal's (ball folly and) Myth.

by Jeff Huber at Antiwar.com

.

.

There is no such thing as a "victory" in the kinds of wars we're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The best one can hope for in these types of conflicts – counterinsurgency efforts in far-flung corners of the globe with fuzzy objectives and vague necessity – is to not be seen as having "lost." For that to happen, unfortunately, you have to stick around for so long and fade away so gradually that, by the time you leave, nobody notices you're gone.

.

(NO, the USA can leave immediately and still "win"

1. The American military is in Afghanistan because of Afghan Opium/Heroin worth about $50 --$80 billion a year once it is sold in the streets of Europe and North America, transported by American military planes....."Opium wars" redux.

.

The British armed forces have cherry picked Helmand province in Southern Afghanistan to base their "counter-insurgency" operations, which is coincidentally the highest poppy growing area in Afghanistan, and since their presence there, production of Opium/Heroin has increased, a few hundred fold and heroin is now far cheaper in the streets of Britain, so we can make some basic deductive assumptions around these facts.

.

The American taxpayer pays for the operation in Afghanistan, and fights these wars, whilst a few criminals in the Pentagon and civilians allied to them profit from them.......the cliche quote......"War is a racket" by General Smedley Butler. In such a scenario obviously most people trying to justify such costly operations would be groping around with cock and bull BS excuses to be in Afghanistan......including the likes of McChrystal, which for rational Americans would not make sense.

2. Iraq was about the Israeli desire for historical revenge for the Jewish peoples enslavement by the Assyrians, and the elimination of a regional rival with potential nuclear programs, and WMD programs generally. Iraq by 1990 had 1.1 million men under arms, 6000 tanks, 4,000 artillery pieces, 550 jets and extensive WMD programs as a result of the Iran/Iraq war, and exclusively in response to much larger, more populous, more powerful Iran.....but Israel was scared/shitting in the pants about this Iraqi might and wanted it neutralized via America.

There are some indications that Saddam was an American installed agent, indicated by the fact that he sought American "permission" to invade Kuwait in 1990, amongst other information, which the American ambassador April Gillespie gave informally, when she met Saddam in July 1990.)

The neoconservative apparatus that got us into Iraq for reasons we still haven’t decided on threatens to keep us in Afghanistan indefinitely for reasons yet to be determined. Everything we’re doing in Central and Southwest Asia supposedly has something to do with eradicating al-Qaeda, yet there is

no sign of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. The argument for persisting in Afghanistan says that we have to make sure al-Qaeda doesn’t go back there, yet as former CIA officer Philip Giraldi recently noted, credible assessments suggest that "Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda has likely been reduced to a core group of eight to ten terrorists who are on the run more often than not."

.

(al-Qaeda as an "organization" with a coherent structure and a clear doctrine does not exist in the Vietcong sense, ANC sense, or Hezbollah sense, never did, but is an elaborate hologram to justify American military operations in certain countries.

.

12,000 mostly Arabs were trained by the Americans/Israelis/ Pakistanis during the 1980's and into the 1990's, initially fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan in a "Jehad". Of these approximately 7,000 went back to their own countries settling down into civilian life, getting married etc....doing the 9---5....or causing problems for those Muslim countries.....Algeria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia,Yemen, Indonesia......and so on.

.

Of the remaining 5,000 in Afghanistan, these courtesy of Iran/America were covertly shipped to the Balkans to fight "infidels" in Bosnia and Kosovo, and act as the Taliban's shock troops to consolidate the country in the 1990's.

.

It is these 5,000 men who were labelled as "al-Qaeda" from 2000/2001, but nearly all of them fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, and then in Bosnia, Kosovo NOT as al-Qaeda, and NOT linked to Osama Bin Laden directly under a clear command structure, taking orders from him.......and NOT involved in any terrorist ops targeting Western assets or civilians. These men if they have been guided by anyone it is the ISI/Pakistan military, which operates under the direction of American/Israeli intelligence/military.

.

Thus it is more exact and correct to say that "al-Qaeda" is a Western/Israeli intelligence hologram front, assisted critically by the ISI. Of these 5,000, many are now dead, a few captured and the rest either in Iran, Pakistan or have returned to their countries of origin.

.

So in summary .......

.

1. The 5,000 who served in "al-Qaeda" could be termed Islamic fundamentalist like Osama, with similar ideological backgrounds........fighting infidels and saving Muslim lands.

.

2. However they are not "al-Qaeda" because there is no evidence that such an organization with a clear command structure ever existed, beyond Osama's immediate fellow travelers of a dozen. There is no clear evidence that the 5,000 accepted Osama as their leader, or took any orders from him.

.

3. The terrorist ops in NE America 2001 9/11, Madrid 2004, and London 7/7 2005 and the attack on the USS Cole 2000 seem to be the work of Israel, usually assisted by friendly local security people allied to Israel........MI-5 etc..... to create a certain narrative which supports ISRAEL'S overall geo-strategic plans ("A Clean Break" 1996,"PNAC" 2000) "Israel's enemies are the West's enemies,so we are in this fight together" basic paraphrased response to a Israeli agent captured in the vicinity of the Twin Towers in 9/11, 2001..........There is no clear indication that the 5,000 of "al-Qaeda" were ever interested in terrorist ops which targeted civilians, especially Western civilians, but rather they were more concerned with fighting irregular warfare against armed opposition groups in the conventional battle field, in Muslim countries.

.

4. The 5,000 membership of "al-Qaeda" were trained/armed/supplied by America/Israel and Pakistan ............................and seemed to have been guided from the beginning to the end as useful appendages to the "Clash of Civilization" meme, and consequently as the justification for invading Afghanistan, and to an extent indirectly Iraq...........Somalia........threaten Pakistan....and so forth.

.

9/11 2001 was a joint Israel/Israeli-American agents operation to justify the current open ended wars, and blamed on "al-Qaeda". The FBI do not think Osama was responsible for 9/11.......and Osama in his last real interview to a Pakistani paper in October 2001 stated that he did not carry out 9/11.

.

SO, Osama was never the leader of these 5,000 men....used extensively by the USA in various theaters, and trained by America/Israel/Pakistan. Osama Bin Laden never sat down with all of them in Afghanistan, and said "lets attack America, so that the American's can occupy several Muslim countries for Israel".......Osama until he died in December 2001 in Pakistan was an American agent, performing their guided theater, surrounded as always by a dozen followers and no more)

_______________________________________

.

THUS.......

.

Osama Bin Laden, code named "Tim Osman" by his Western intelligence handlers was a Western trained security operative, a go-between/coordinator for Western intelligence with the numerous "jehadi" operatives. The man sought publicity, Western and domestic, wearing his exotic clothes and even more exotic speeches.....giving interviews to newspapers, magazines,television channels and so on...thats how you build a terrorist hologram for your Western Intelligence handlers.

.

These direct media interviews and footage of his movement with his rent a followers suddenly stopped in late 2001............thus the widely held belief that he actually died in December 2001. Since late 2003 all we have had is fake video presentations by him in a studio, and taped speeches.

.

So deductive summary....

.

Osama Bin Laden/Tim Osman, the Western intelligence operative died in December 2001, or killed in that year so that he would not give too many further live interviews stating that he did not carry out 9/11......why would a diehard Jehadi lie about such a deed anyway? If he really did it, he would obviously take credit, surely?

.

The video, and tape recordings of Osama since late 2003 are fake. So somebody is going to great lengths to present fake information, and subsequently verifying them as authentic. If this is indeed the case it is not a great stretch to imagine that "al-Qaeda" was never a real global terrorist organization, and that "al-Qaeda" did not carry out 9/11 . Osama denied he carried out 9/11 in October 2001 to a Pakistani newspaper; Benazir Bhutto in her November 2nd 2007 interview with David Frost states Omer Shaikh,the British intelligence operative killed Osama in late 2001.....and finally the FBI do not think he carried out or ordered 9/11.

.

The American government since 2001 has never produced substantial proof that "al-Qaeda"carried out 9/11.

.

If Osama did not carry out 9/11, and "al-Qaeda" did not carry out 9/11, then who did? All the information leads towards hardline Likudnik Israelis in the state security structure of Israel working in tandem with like minded people in the USA........and to understand who.... All you have to do is read the "Clean Break" document 1996, and "Project For A New American Century" 2000....to get a finger at the REAL perpetrators.

.

_______________________________________

.

For the sake of keeping fewer than a dozen evildoers out of Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal and his legion of supporters in the Pentagon, Congress, and the media insist we need to bring increase U.S. troop levels to over 100,000, and the overall coalition force level to a half-million, the number of troops we had on the ground at one point in Vietnam.

.

(unless we are looking at a buildup invasion force against Pakistan in the future........and more war.

.

Whilst the occupation forces aren't clearly fighting"al-Qaeda" they are fighting the Taliban.........that part Jeff is not a myth.

.

So lets look at the Taliban.

.

The Taliban is the love child of the USA, whilst Pakistan is the midwife and mentor which gave it birth in 1994, and the Gulf states as always the funders of this latest piece of American/Israeli mischief, allegedly, laughably in hindsight to bring peace and stability to war torn Afghanistan .

.

Numbering about 10,000 drawn exclusively from the ranks of the ethnic Pashtuns, lightly armed with AK-47 and not much else: poor military training; poor logistics; poor C&C; no heavy equipment; poor leadership; no real overall general strategy; no aircover.............and inevitably consequently to date losing every engagement against the Coalition forces, so a turkey shoot.

.

But touted as a real threat to the puppet Kabul government, and to the American homeland by implication...."we are fighting them over there so that we don't have to fight them over here in our country".......The Taliban sticks to fighting in Afghanistan, and the Pashtun parts of Pakistan........10,000 verses 500,000 soon to be Afghan and coalition security forces, AND 1,100,000 Pakistani security forces,controlled by the USA

.

Under International law if any of the 192 GA countries are occupied by foreign armed forces, then the people under foreign occupation have the right to seek "self-determination", and can organize themselves as a resistance movement against the foreign occupation force........the law is clear in this area. So for example if America is occupied by a foreign military power, Americans can organize themselves into a resistance movement, AND seek material assistence from Canada or Mexico......under international law Mexico and Canada would be duty bound to provide food, shelter and arms with training for the "American Liberation Movement".

.

This law evolved over a period of 60 years, after world war II, when many people around the world, under colonial rule were struggling for "self-determination"........and the international community, including First World countries, with Socialist bloc countries came to accept the fundamental principle of "self-determination".........People had the right to govern themselves, and not be occupied and exploited by foreign alien entities. For the rule of "self-determination" to apply to any nation, only a significant portion of the population must be united in the resistance movement, presumably over 50%............does the Taliban have the support of over 50% of the Afghan population? or a significant portion, because if they do then it is a legitimate resistance movement seeking "self determination" for the Afghan people.

.

Then in such a scenario, under clear international law accepted by rich and poor countries alike over 60 years, the Taliban have the right to seek shelter, logistics and arms from the governments of Pakistan, Iran, Uzbekistan, and China..........these governments and nations which are neighbors of Afghanistan have a duty under international law to provide all manner of support to the Taliban.

.

However there are problems with this .........and the question of the Taliban.

.

Problem number 1 was/is the Americans and especially Bush II regime which emphasized American exceptionalism.............America by implication is above the law; as the sole hyper power it does not have to follow international rules.......second by implication again, because of the crimes committed by "al-Qaeda" allegedly was so great in 9/11 (remember the FBI do not think Osama Bin Laden committed 9/11, and the USA government have not offered detailed evidence linking "al-Qaeda" to 9/11)......America in revenge can do as it pleases, including absolving it of any international obligations.........under this new Bush doctrine America can threaten Afghan neighbors who support legitimate Afghan resistance movements.

.

The second problem is with the Taliban itself. It is a hardline Sunni Islamic fundamentalist group which even the mullahs of Iran labeled "fossilized dinosaurs"......there are 192 nations on earth, and it is quite right that morally, socially, culturally, economically every nation on earth should attempt to modernize themselves, and look forward in history....which means striving for democratic governments that are transparent and accountable to the people, elected legislatures, the rule of law which is not arbitrary, a vibrant civil society, an incorruptible neutral judiciary, economic elevation for all.........all the good wholesome things which every people of all shades agree on should be available to ALL, enshrined in the UDHR, and ICCPR and ICSECR........BUT somehow I don't think the Taliban would sign on to such universal notions and attempt to deliver on such things....in fact quite the reverse.

.

Another problem is with the Taliban again..........Is the Taliban created by the USA, through the Pakistan military a true home grown resistance movement that seeks in the jargon of international law, "self-determination" for the majority of its people? For example like the ANC, based in Mozambique initially, or the Vietcong based in North Vietnam....................OR as hinted is it more likely that it is yet another "Controlled opposition" group used as the fifth column by America to justify American occupation of Afghanistan?.....My personal opinion is that the Taliban are not a true resistance movement that has the best interests of the majority of Afghans, fighting for "self-determination"....though obviously the rank and file of the Taliban may feel that they are fighting for their country.

.

The final problem with the Taliban is that it has powerful enemies around Afghanistan, which will make it near impossible for them to regain power..........if and when the Americans finally have satisfied their lust for narco-profits, and leave Afghanistan. Shia Iran does not like Sunni hard line Taliban, and came to near blows with them in 1998 when Iran massed 250,000 troops on the Afghan border, after some Iranian diplomats were butchered in Mazar-i-sharif. Iran backs the Northern Alliance against the Taliban; has fully cooperated with the USA since Afghanistan was invaded in 2001 and is investing heavy into various projects to bolster the current puppet government in Kabul; Ditto Russia for historical reasons.....sees the Taliban as the extension of the mujaheddin which fought against their soldiers and killed/MIA 20,000 of them, and wounded 50,000...resulting in a humiliating retreat for the superpower; ditto India who does not wish to see Pakistan achieve "strategic depth" viz India in Afghanistan, which makes the Pakistanis confident into renewing attacks against India, especially in Kashmir.

.

India views the Taliban as the proxy of the Pakistan military which is absolutely correct, but is also a half analysis. To be more precise a better perspective from which to make ALL intelligence assessments of Pakistan,over a longer time span would be to view the Pakistani military as an annex of British intelligence, and the American military, especially since 1954 when the $1 billion Security Pact was signed with the USA by Mohammed Ali Bogra/General Ayub Khan with the Eisenhower administration. Since then the Pakistani military have been acting as the regional proxy of the USA in security ops against Iran, Afghanistan, China, INDIA and against the Pakistani people themselves. Senior military officers are sent to the USA for training. At present the Pakistan military run Pakistan from the back seat deciding on ALL security issues, and a substantial portion of foreign policy.....whilst Zardari, the American installed puppet busy's himself with looting the state coffers, and gives the veneer of democratic legitimacy to the Pakistani state.

.

Thus the number one enemy of the Pakistani people, and for South Asian stability, harmony and development is the Chamar Chamacha Chauds in the Pakistan military (aka: Raj Pooooonjab Police Force). It must be dismantled and destroyed....and a new military instituted in its place that reflects the true beliefs, values and interests of the Pakistani people.

.

My personal view is that the Americans should leave Afghanistan asap, BUT the Taliban should NOT take power after they leave.......sufficient support must be given to alternative groups in Afghanistan..........but such good will intentions and outcome will not come from the Americans, busy with their narco enterprise.............and certain sado-machoistic penchant for attacking Afghan wedding parties and celebrations....Afghanistan has banned gay marriages)

The half-million figure comes from the counterinsurgency field manual (FM 3-24, Counterinsurgency [.pdf]), which calls for 20 to 25 counterinsurgent forces per every 1,000 locals, and Afghanistan contain a tad over 28 million locals. Your cat can do the math from there. What your cat can’t tell you is the thought process behind the conclusion that it makes sense to pit a half-million persons under arms against a force of eight or ten persons who aren’t in the vicinity of where you plan to place your half-million armed people.

.

(If you love war and think YOU are the center of the world, attacking wedding parties, attacking civilians, strutting around in uniform, feeling self important, giving media presentations to the world, heroin, opium........bloated Pentagon security budgets which are untraceable in the trillions........then of course any obvious cock and bull will be offered)

That’s because your cat’s thought process isn’t as short-circuited as the cognitive quagmire going on in the minds of McChrystal and the people backing him.

The short version of this loopy logic equation goes like this: you put McChrystal in charge and he’s asking for what an official doctrine manual says he should ask for, so you have to give it to him. This skips over a trail of false assumptions that, lined up end to end, would span the Khyber Pass.

The requirement for a half-million to ten superiority ratio should have been laughed out of the discussion the moment it was mentioned. The counterinsurgency manual’s dictum that we must "convince the people of the government’s legitimacy" contains two dismal flaws in the context of Afghanistan (and Iraq as well). There is no convincing the Afghan people of the legitimacy of the Hamad Karzai government or any other government we replace it with.

.

(He has been in power approaching 8 years with nothing to recommend him, his brother is the biggest narco dealer in the country after the American/British military, and his deputy is a notorious criminal war lord........which ALL Afghans know about, guarded as always by American security overtly..........and we talk about "convincing" the Afghans of the legitimacy of their leader? Ordinary Afghans live in Afghanistan, they know the real score. A Pentagon manual isn't going to teach them otherwise)

The biggest flaw in the pro-McChrystal plan argument is that the counterinsurgency manual reflects tried-and-true tactics and strategy. There has never been such a thing as a triumphant counterinsurgency conflict. These types of wars have all been indecisive and draining quagmires; the sorts of conflicts that Sun Tzu warned us about over two thousand years ago when he said "No nation ever profited from a long war."

Yet it is that the military-industrial-congressional complex has adopted the "long war" concept, a gem of tank thinkery straight out of Orwell designed to keep America on a permanent wartime economy and in an endless state of fear and loathing of enemies vaguely defined and overly demonized.

Lacking a peer military adversary since the end of the Cold War, the American war mafia, headed by Bill Kristol’s Israeli-centric neoconservative cabal, casts about desperately for a "new Pearl Harbor" to justify its existence. The 9/11 attacks gave them the "catalyst" they needed to justify the invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan. It remains to be seen if we’ll be able to pull out of the flat spin they have flown us into.

.

(We can add AIPAC, Israel, the American Jewish media..........I suppose this goes as far as possible in such a site implicating Israel for 9/11............"A Clean Break" document 1996, PNAC 2000)

The greatest fallacy in the counterinsurgency doctrine is the notion that we can partner with the host nation to establish order and security. As U.S. Army Col. Timothy Reese recently observed, our years of effort at establishing a competent and reliable government and security apparatus in Iraq have come to naught. The "ineffectiveness and corruption" of Iraq’s government, he wrote in a recent memorandum, "is the stuff of legend." Of Iraq’s security forces, he wrote, "corruption among officers is widespread."

.

(No honest Iraqi would work with the American/Israeli occupation forces after what has transpired in Iraq under their control......1.2 million dead civilians and 4.5 million refugees....so you hire thief's, murders, liars and pimps...........the only problem with hiring thief's, liars, murderers and pimps to do your work it is that they are not very good at running countries for some strange reason, and $ billions disappear, and you ask why? Iraq, Afghanistan, PAKISTAN)

Laziness is "endemic," Reese said, and "Lack of initiative is legion." These and other compelling reasons are why Reese recommended that it’s time to "declare victory" in Iraq and go home.

.

(Reese sounds like a racist fucker.............between 1757--1947, the British starved to death around 30 million "surplus" Indians who were deemed "lazy", including many Aryans amongst them..........the problem is not the"lazy" natives, but the occupation by alien entities who don't have the best of intentions for the hosts they occupy, and the use of local thief's, liars, murderers and pimps of these colonial countries under foreign occupation.

.

Iraq is the "Cradle of Civilization"..........the base of human civilization from where humanity gets its basics of existence..........and then remarkably again under Muslim rule it became the center of Arab civilization. Before the invasion of 2003, Iraq had the highest literacy rate in the Middle East, and universal free health care......with 70% of the population living in cities, despite having psycho Saddam as its leader............"laziness" doesn't come into the equation; the ONLY problem is the American occupation of a Muslim country, and the presence of many Israeli security advisers in the country)

To think we can do better than this in Afghanistan is the epitome of delusion. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, which we backed in a long war against Iran during the 1980s, was a real country with a real army and real institutions and infrastructure. Afghanistan has always been a fourth-world wasteland. When it comes to Afghanistan, our counterinsurgency manual amounts to little more than a ream of latrine linen.

The only reason we’re still playing political patty-cake about what to do in Afghanistan – or anywhere else in that part of the world – is to determine who gets the blame for "losing." A popular adage of war says it’s the losers who determine when they’re over. So, the logic goes, as long as we don’t quit, we can’t lose. Hence the "long war."

It’s all about seeing who gets the blame for failing to do the impossible.
.

(Well Jeff, there's only so much wisdom we can expect from military men......unless there is an actual world war,the brightest and best in society don't head to the military in First World societies..............living in military barracks surrounded by a lot of gay men, studying war and fighting........in fact quite the opposite. What McCrystal says is predictable; that is what a military man in charge of operations in Afghanistan would say. What"we" don't want is the American military establishment defining and dictating American state policy,through the media and through their Think Tanks.............that undermines true American democracy if it exists. It is the job of the civilian elected political leaders in Capitol Hill who should give clear leadership and clear definition on all foreign policy, aggressively reviewing and analyzing all areas........taking into account general public sentiments.........rather then grunting on in a gay way with open ended wars.........and playing the falsely wound up patsy of Israeli geo-strategic folly.)

Israel's butt buddies

.
.
.
.
Ahmedinejad's speeches at the UN are always GUARANTEED good Jewish vaudiville acts, presumably that is why the leader of a Third World country that is not overly significant is allowed to perform in the global platform of the UN, smack BANG BANG in the middle of Jew York, over the speechifying requirements of other leaders around the world that have something slightly more constructive to say; there are after all 57 other Muslim majority countries with leaders who shall we say are a little bit more balanced than Ahmedinejad and Gadaffi. Two regimes installed by the USA/UK in the first place. ............thats why faggot, cross dressing eccentric Gaddafi, leader of an unremarkable desert state of 4 million has remained in power for 40 years without being particuarly effective as a leader or as regime, with so much controversial history..................the same with the mullah's of Iran in power for 30 years, with so much controversey behind them, and a deeply unpopular ineffective regime that renmains in power through coercive force, threats, torture and out right murder.

The Clash of Civilisation meme coutesy of British arch agent academic Jew Bernard Lewis, stoked from the 1970's is waning, and so what better way to remind the world of the "problem" then invite these installed clowns to Jew York to perform their usual acts of sheer theatrics.

Beyond the tireless predictable threatics, these staged stunts smack bang in the middle of Jew York are informative in another way..............they indicate to us the level of "control' Israel and the Jew exercise over particular countries around the world. We know the type of speech Ahmedinejad is going to deliver, so why be suprised? Its not as if this is the first time he has made such speeches. So the walking out by certain diplomats of certain countries is an indication to us which are the true "butt buddies" of Israel, since Israel has ordered these First World countries which Third World country is now a mortal threat to Israel.

However the type of "butt buddies" of Israel varies, there are several categories. Generally speaking most of Israel's in bed closet "butt budies" are in Occidental countries where significant Jew populations reside, and the Jew through the Rothschild banking network initially were able to build a power base in certain Western countries, over the last 200 years, just after the Napoleonic wars.

Category 1 "butt buddy"

The USA state: 8--9 million Jews in the USA, The Israel lobby, the prominant position of Jews in USA politics...Teddy Roosevelt, possibly the first Crypto-Jew president and the beginning of the American quest for empire; FD Roosevelt; Truman; Eisenhower; Lyndon Johnson; Clinton regime being the most Jewish...1993---2001.....since then an emphasis on having Jews of Israeli origin with Israeli citzenship credentials, serving and servicing Israel extensively through sensitive positions of the American state such as in the Defence/Pentagon, and State Department. Backed by Christian Zionists made of 30 million religious batshit wacko's( a really queer paradox in a modern state), who are conditioned into believing that by supporting Israel they are fulfilling a religious mission for Jesus's second coming and the present existence, and on-going wars in the Israeli hinterland and final "sacrifice" of Israel is a key to that; the FBI implicated in ALL false flag ops in the USA........The USA media.......the key brainwashing mechanism over the rest of the helpless 98% American gentile population.

The French State: Especially so since Mossad agent Sarkozy was elected President. Unoffically 1 million Jews live in France.

Category 2 "Butt buddy"

UK state, German state, Denmark state, Holland state, Spain, Switzerland state, Ukraine state, Hungary state, Turkey state, Pakistan state, Iraq state, Afghan state, Iran state, Uzbekistan state, Italy state, Austria state, Poland state, Georgia.



Category 3 "butt buddy"

Russian state( historically Russia with the Ukraine had the largest Jewish population mainly through conversion during AD 800---1000.................), Indian state (via RAW/BJP/aspects of Indian media), Sri Lankan state, Indonesian state, Cambodian state.

Whats the problem with being Israel's "butt buddy"? Well as the allegory suggests if you are not Israel then in such a relationship you are in danger of being seriously "shafted". With the Jew there is no such thing as equality, reciprocity and live and let live........true friendship.

Nations cultivate normal "relationships" with other nations which last for many years.........Germany with Austria; the UK with Portugal; Norway with Sweden; The USA with Canada........because there are good wholesome reasons for such relationships between the countries.

Jew control of the media in a given gentile country, of political interfence through local and foreign agents in a given gentile country, of "cooperation" with the security of a gentile country does not a make true friendship which has mutual beneficial consequences for ALL; never does................it is the gentile country that ultimately always gets shafted by the Jew....that is how it has to be.

Russia is the classic example of that.........starting from 1918, and the Bolshevik revolution. Those countries that do not have large Jew populations presently, however should not be overly unguarded......The Jew now is a global phenomenon, with their particular agenda's. If Israel cultivates relationships with a state which is very unlike itself then it is because they have ther own agenda's to fulfill, which invariably ultimately will clash with the interests of the host nation.

Desert Fairy Tales.

.
.
.
.
What is in the bible, and believed at different degrees by Muslims and Jews as people of the book, are purely desert fairy tales ..........but it is amazing the extent to which the greater part of the worlds population believe in such nonsense. This is the testament to the power of a good story sold to the masses, and the level of indoctrination with propaganda which mesmerizes so many people.........the modern fairy tale stories that Saddam's Iraq was a mere 45 minute's away threat to America, or that the ancient, reclusive, isolated, 4th world, and medievel state of Afghanistan was ever a threat to the USA or the world, which America with NATO had to be occupied for 8 years or more as a failed narco state in order to protect the world.

All desert fairy tales.
____________________________________________

From Mike Rivero at What Really Happened.

Egypt is literally littered with the ruins of the ancient temples and palaces of her rulers. As much as has been found, it is estimated that only 1/3 of Egypt's archeological wonders have been uncovered to date. A newly discovered temple was uncovered while digging a sewer line, and a cache of finely preserved mummies was literally stumbled over by a cow in a pasture.

Iraq's ancient heritage was enshrined in its ancient sites and museum. As a result of the war, many of those sites have been damaged or destroyed. Part of the ancient city or Ur now lies underneath a US air base runway. The treasures of the museum have only partly been recovered. The treasures from the looted archaeological sites have been scattered to the world.

Likewise, Iran has a rich archaeological heritage marking its place in history.

All of this wealth of archaeological treasures must of course annoy Israel. We are raised from birth with Old Testament tales of the greatness of the ancient Israelites, of the powerful kingdoms of Solomon and David and the first temple. Yet Israel, while rich in antiquities, is almost totally devoid of artifacts from this supposedly glorious time in her history. The existence of the fabled First Temple was supported with just two artifacts, a carved staff ornament in the shape of a pomegranate and the Jehoash tablet. Both of these artifacts have been exposed as frauds. We are told that once there was a magnificent temple on that hill, but it "all went away." The wonders emerging from the soil of Egypt, Iraq, and Iran serve as a constant reminder that ancient buildings of such a scale as we are told the First Temple was simply do not vanish without a trace.

There is considerable reason to suspect that the tales told in the Old Testament are just that; tales. The Bible is not science, it is the collected stories of a primitive tribal people reminding each other how important they are. And like fishermen talking about the one that got away, or Ramses with his temple carvings of the did-not-really-happen victory over the Hittites at Kadesh, the writers of the ancient testaments assumed that the people they were telling stories to had no way to verify the claims for themselves. So "embellishment" was a low-risk activity.

We do know from the available archaeological evidence that the Exodus probably actually happened to the Hyksos, not the Israelites. We know that the story of Moses is suspect because no Egyptian princess would hide a Hebrew child inside Pharaoh's household, then give the kid a Hebrew name ("Moses" is actually an Egyptian title meaning "Prince" and is included in the names of many Pharaoh's names such as Tut-Moses, Ah-Moses, Ra-Moses (Ramses) etc.)

Likewise, the story of Masada may be less than accurate. The remains found on the mountain were buried with pig bones, something no proper Jewish funeral would tolerate, which suggests that the bodies found and venerated as heroes of ancient Judea were actually those of dead Roman Soldiers.

But a good story is a good story and the writers of the ancient texts were probably not thinking much further into the future than the guys who pen the "Celebrity dates space alien" stories you see at supermarket checkout lines. The fact that the celebrity is a real person does not prove the space alien exists. It's just a story.

Given enough time, even a simple story written in jest can take on a life of its own. Scientology began as a bet between two science fiction writers; look how wide spread that has become in just a short time.

But, over time, entire religions with attendant wealth and power structures have been built on the premise that these old testament stories really happened exactly as written. And today, here in the 21st century world, science has started to catch up with these ancient legends and call many of them into doubt.

So, for a nation that justifies its existence on the writings of the Torah, the plethora of sites and artifacts confirming the ancient histories of Egypt, Iraq, Iran, etc. etc. etc. must seem a dire political threat for a nation whose own ancient history seems to have left little if any traces at all.

........Ouch!!!!!!!!!!!!........Your in danger of encouraging Israel in the wrong direction.

But presumably the Romans did interact with a type of Jewish peoples whose identity had evolved into a form of Judaism which might not be recognized by modern Jewish standards and practices, 2000 years ago (see "The Last Temptation of Christ" to get a glimpse)........and presumably they were freed from slavery and captivity in ancient Babylon when the Persians invaded the area in 538 BC, unless these are also desert fairy tales too........as to Esther saving the lives of countless Jews, celebrated around the Jewish holiday of Purim.......again no historical basis, or evidence around that.

So in sum total the Jewish race that came out of what is now Israel is real enough, and according to professor Shlomo Sands many dispersed around the world after the Romans sacked Jerusalem, but as many were also converts from other races in Western, and Arab countries.........a good deal of the modern Palestinians are of Jewish origin, but for the fact that they converted to Islam from Judaism.....not a big jump in religious faith and practices (see the modern Samaritans at prayer......which represents the old form of Judaism).

The colorful amazing stuff such as 40 years in the desert of Sinai, a non-existent Moses parting waves, Salomon...David...Sampson........blah, blah blah that's the fairy tale propaganda.......and why blame them? Don't all races and nations mythologize to a greater or lessor degree about themselves?

As long as it does not lead to any harm hey; around misconstrued ideas, EGOs and false ambitions?

The question of Jinnah and the BJP.

.
.
.
.
Yes I have been following the saga, not in great depth, but it is worth commenting on as I am doing now.

What is the significance of the saga for India, for Pakistan.....for South Asia generally?

Not significant? Just a couple of old farts, in the twilight of their political life lamenting and reflecting on a long past insignificant story, candidly in the way old farts do as they trace their life history...............babbling on without proper political timing, coherent context and singular political purpose???? (Advani and Singh )

Or something more sinister and Machiavellian?...............By painting Jinnah as a secular man, who was very moderate and reasonable.....someone who was accommodating and flexible (all good things), they are trying to insinuate that the sad traumatic unnecessary partition of India for ALL was the result of Congress and its leadership failures, and specifically Nehru. If that were so, then that would be really sad, and low in politics, never mind that politics does attract a lot of the low, sad, criminal sort, especially in India, or maybe I should say especially South Asia.

I instinctively NEVER thought when Advani published his book in 2005 and came out with the "Jinnah was secular" meme Advani was taking a dig at Congress.......it was an auto biography by a man who had a lot of rich memories and by writing the autobiography presumably Advani was attempting to come to terms with his life, the highs and the lows, and sharing those experiences with a wide an audience as possible, surely? Isn't that why the great and the good write auto biographies....to set the record straight as it were, rather than as vindictive retributive tools?

Obviously when you are a high profile political/public figure, people invariably can gauge secondary, or multilayered meanings which simply may not exist in the original text......but this is the hazard of being a prominent political person........your every words are scrutinized, and examined...and this is how it is every where. But I do not believe the intentions of Advani and Jaswant Singh were in this direction for one moment; just old men perhaps reaching a position of greater wisdom, genuinely lamenting the partition of India............which I too regret genuinely. I do genuinely regret the partition of India....it was unnecessary, wasteful and destructive...and if Pakistan is occupied by the Americans proper, the situation for South Asia will get worse, in the manner of Bengal in 1757, and a certain Mir Jafar. History can repeat itself, sometimes.

Let me briefly enlighten you on how my perspectives about Pakistan, India and partition changed........gradually over time, slowly. In doing so perhaps you might begin to understand why L K Advani and Jaswant Singh from the BJP of all parties made their statements as they did through their books respectively, more recently.

I have mixed both with Pakistanis and Indians socially and they have been mostly good experiences. When you interact with others socially you begin to see them as just another human being, and you begin to focus on the similarities......what inerests you both.....basic function of socialisation. Then when I began writing about Pakistan securty post 9/11, I came to the conclusion that Pakistan was the aggressor nation viz India........this would be around late 2003, not 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago. Then I considered the Pakistan state....a failed state, which seems to be incapable of providing the basics for its people...........but on the contrary quite often in a rather casual manner kills millions of its own people. A state that has been involved in American sponsored schemes/mischief around the region which have a tendency to boomerang onto the country.......but they never seem to learn this hard fact.

So what is the justification of such a state? To be sure India is not a shining beacon of light which I am yearning to rush to work and live in BUT, what if partition did not happen? What would have been the benefits of such an outcome for South Asia generally?

For all my meager wisdom, unlike Advani and Jaswant Singh, I think the outcome for South Asia of a united India would have been far far better, than it is now.....at the moment the spat between India and Pakistan running over 62 years is a total farce......a dangerous time consuming wasteful argument which has involved three wars, and as many near wars, without any solutions.

It is in that broader sense, with all the cost and damage to the region, with Pakistan being used as a security ops proxy by outside alien powers.....with ALL the consequences........... that I regret the partition of India. I regret what Jinnah did.......looking at the situation in hind sight. I regret that he partitioned India, knowing that he was only going to get a moth eaten rumb statelet which was going to fail. I regret that he pushed for Pakistan when he knew he wouldn't live long to see it and realize it himself. I regret the destruction of cultures and communities which had co existed for 1000 upon thousands of years.......this was the work of Jinnah and nobody else.

I have even gone further and suggested that he was a Raj spy, maneuvered into place to effect their agenda, and I stand by that accusation.

It is in that sense that I think praising Jinnah especially now is wrong. In the context of BJP politics and their responsibilities to their party and to their country I am quite sure that there are far more current and urgent issues which the BJP as a party in opposition needs to focus on rather than get side tracted into non-issue matters of history, thick with emotion for many, but of very little relevance to the present. These sort of things are best discussed within the confines of the proper intellectual circles within the party, rather than bring them out in the open.

BUT if by praising Jinnah one is attempting some kind of rapprochement with the "other side" than I accept it as a good intentioned gesture. But not as a political tactic to take a dig at the Congress Party; there are other more OBVIOUS ways one can criticize the current Congress Party, without being so cryptic.

Nehru was not a great leader, he had faults....and he made many mistakes. As to Gandhi imagine India now if his ideology were taken in its literal form and translated into India's foreign policy, defense policy and economic policy.............utter, utter disaster would have ensued in India, and the Congress Party knew that, that is why they never instituted a significant portions of his ideas into state policy.........be that as it may, they cannot however be blamed for the Partition of India..........that sad occurrence was the work of Jinnah, and if one believes ones instincts, the Raj manipulated Jinnah through their numerous agents in India...........that is why they were in such a "hurry' to leave India, without actually leaving........independence would have been too late for them in 1948, after being in the vicinity of the subcontinent for 200 odd years. Samje?

So on to Mr. Jaswant Singh. To challenge ones cherishly held ideas every now and than and reflect upon them requires quite of bit of courage and a great deal of reflective thinking.....so his comments and his book I thoroughly commend and recommend. I hope he visits Pakistan and makes it his second home. When he visits the country he should reach out to a wide an audience as possible.........and in between book signings he should:

1. Lecture why for all the reasons the partition was morally, economically, politically, socially, culturally, psychologically and militarily wrong....he shouldn't babble on but have specific sound bites that are genuine in content. Clear precise answers.

2. What in his opinion were the true role of the Congress, the Raj and Jinnah with the Muslim League in the partition of India. This should definitely not be a Congress bashing session.

3. How India and Pakistan, specifically NOW can come closer together in all respects. What practical ideas does he have for this important task.

Bhai saab, Pakistan isn't another Iraq under "American declared LIBERATION and DEMOCRACY" is it yet?

.
.
.
.


Al-Maliki of Iraq can definitively state that the Zio-Christian fundamentalist mercenary out fit of Blackwater is not in Iraq, and that it definitely does not recruit Israelis in its ranks. Al-Maliki can further conform that they won't be roaming Iraq killing top scientists in the country who were connected to the former Saddam regimes WMD programs.

America is in Iraq ONLY to spread peace, love, democracy, transparency, reconstruction, economic development and effective governance, after decades of Socialist Ba' athist dictatorship under Saddam.

Al-Malaki swears all this supreme truth publicly, and openly without a second of hesitation to his beloved countrymen on the Koran and upon the honor of his family name, and they must believe him surely.(the actual speech was prepared at the American embassy)




Al-Maliki further states that no Iraqi bases are being used to launch missiles controlled by the USA which kill mainly Iraqi civilians, and not much else. (the missiles are part of a psych war specifically directed against Iraqis to demonstrate American technical and racial superiority, never mind that 95% of the casualties list published by the Iraqi government show to be innocent civilians)

Al-Maliki and his colleagues affirm the sovereignty of Iraq and the independence of the people to choose their own destiny. Al-Maliki fully supports and believes in the proud heritage of his country from the dawn of time, to the present as the "Cradle of civilization"....and that no foreign power great and small have the right to interfere with its internal affairs........especially a country like the USA, a rogue dangerous power run by mad Jews with agenda's.....and very little mercy. Al-Maliki does not have a second home in America, and has no foreign bank accounts.



Al-Maliki can definitely confirm that the biggest USA embassy in the world will soon not be in Bagdad, containing 1800 personnel........including military personnel.........and nobody should show any concern or alarm about this strange development least of all the Iraqi people.

It is absolutely normal for America to have big big embassies in small failed states.......please believe me, stay calm and watch some telly to pass the time.

Al-Maliki can further confirm that there aren't over half a dozen bases in the country which contain American Military personnel, including bases near highly sensitive sights close to Sargoda.

America equals love and peace..........as in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mean while a few years later.............2012.



The Chimp in chief at his palace in Islamabad says that he hasn't amassed $10 billion........he is a poor man of the people, who ONLY thinks of his people in Pakistan. But he requires American security to protect him because he says "al-Qaeda" working through various name changing umberrla organisations is very active in that area.......that is the only reason he has allowed the 3,000 strong American embassy next to his presidential palace.


The Chimp further adds that there simply is no evidence that 5 million Pakistanis have been killed through sectarian violence........attributed to the Liberating American Forces and their institution of "Operation Peace and stabilization" program from 2010.






The Chimp in chief denies that 20 million Pakistanis have "escaped" to India as refugees. There is absolutely no truth to the rumor that the women in these refugee camps are selling their pudi for 1 rupee a go..........The president says he knows because his own intelligence told him the going rate is 4 rupee a go, and he makes 20% on all such transactions.



But, but, but Pakistan is a nuclear power....which spent $20 billion on the project, defeating and overcoming a concerted Zionist effort to prevent the country from acquiring the bomb over several decades, with the sacrifice of lives and deep effort by the great many from the country.....50 warheads........800,000 in the military....and 300,000 paramilitary........2,500 tanks...2,000 artillery...450 jets.....how can America overpower such a state? If North Korea is independent, why can't Pakistan be so?

The fundamental problem of the state is the Pakistan military (always has been from day one of independence in August 1947), especially the top brass lacking in strategic and moral courage, and their all too close alliance with the USA. In addition their destabilization of Pakistani politics over many decades in order to stay in power.

They never came to the simple truth that Jew run America could never be friends or a real realiable ally of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan........that any such relationship would be fake and to the disadvantage of Pakistan generally.....always as subsequent experience has shown.

Its not as if the Pakistani chamcha chaud military have had great experience with the Americans either........America destabilized Field Marshal Ayub Khan from 1965---1969...perhaps that is why he titled his autobiography "Friends not Masters" (1967)...reflectively. The American's killed General Zia and the entire top brass...and destabilized General Musharaf out of power more recently, and installed the Chimp in chief Zardari.

But these sad kuta chauds in uniform do not learn....they repeat the mistake for themselves and so their country, again, again, again and again. They look stupid, act stupid, no Izzat, sharam or tamiz against their own brothers and sisters.

The Pakistani military is the true and main enemy of the Pakistani people. We do not blame Jew America using Pakistan for its own ends cynically.

The Pakistan military itself does not have a glorious record; it fights its bloodiest wars against its own people in East Pakistan, Baluchistan and now the NWFP....where in there are other more civilized options in dealings with ones own kith and kin and fellow countrymen....but I bet a trillion $ any day that when the Americans finally decide to fully invade and occupy the country the Kuta Chaud Pakistan military will not resist and fight so vigorously as they have done against their own people in the past and present......kuta chaud....kuta chaud....kuta chaud.........the Turkish military have a good fighting record; the Vietnamese military have a good fighting record...........and to an exten the Indian military have a good fighting record, against Pakistan mainly.....examples of Third World states which have produced fine institutions which the people can be proud of.

The Pakistan military on the other hand operates as a service center for USA geo-strategy in the Greater Middle East and South Asia.........training up groups against Iran, Afghanistan, China, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka....and so on, and the ordinary Pakistani society will feel what gratitude they get from America eventually.

And so in the future when the American slowly take over Pakistan and a terrible civil war ensues as in Iraq......the above Mir Jafar's will be retired some where in America, playing golf, exchanging old stories with the MOSSAD agent Busharaf, and sadly reflecting on the fact that they can no longer play their games with Pakistan.

So what is the solution?

The Pakistani people cannot rely on their corrupt inept political leadership, and the even worse military to save them from American "Liberation" with all the dire consequences of what might then ensure in the country..........I suggest you read all the "alternative reporting" from Iraq, and as a Pakistani you will get a idea of what might follow.

Pakistanis must organise around alternative leaders who are not tainted like the present sad lot............in doing so they must not scuumb to Islamic fundamentalism, and the politics of the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The Taliban are run by the Pakistan military at the behest of the Americans since 1994...........in machiavellian politics the Taliban are known as "Controlled opposition" .....they provide the justification for the Americans to be in Afghanistan, and soon as it is developing in Pakistan since 2001. The same with al-Qaeda......in this machiavellian Jewish/American game the Pakistan military have played a central pivotal role, more than anybody else around the world, and in Pakistan itself. They have both sustained the al-Qaida myth, and continue to train, arm, finance the Afghan and Pakistan Taliban.....whilst purportedly fighting them to the end................this is quite a machiavellian achievement, no doubt guideded by the American embassy.

Most Pakistani generals....the 130 or so serving and retired are guaranteed millionaires; businessmen, hustlers, wheeler dealers..............NOT military men with honor or dignity.....if the price is right they can sell their own grandmothers, no problem saab! They have sold 700 mainly innocent civilians to the Americans as "al-Qaida" since 2001....INNOCENT because the Americans themselves have subsequently released many of them..........and if you follow the arrest patterns of these "al-Qaeda" people, you will see that the pattern is usually linked to American domestic political needs and requirements.....so the show is a total charade.........the same with the capture of the 5 Taliban leaders in Swat very recently......you guessed on 9/11..."celebration day".

..................So when these Mir Jafar kuta Generals are finally brought to account, and stripped of their rank, and medals...........when they have been tried and executed..........their bodies must be burnt on a funeral pyre............and an invited low caste hindu priest from South India must read the last burial rights for them, and their ashes spread in either Israel or America, NOT PAK--I---STAN.

Pakistanis, through peaceful means must reclaim Islamabad first and foremost from the quiet American occupation/invasion....then they must de-select by whatever means the present corrupt regime, and then elect a more effective regime there after.

Pakistan zindabad!

The MOSSAD Mohammed cartoon saga, and the promotion of Far Right politics in Europe..

.
.
.
.
An article by Professor James Petras that was published a few years back at the height of the Mohamed cartoons controversy. This gives us a better perspective and context to the recent Far Right riots in the UK, the riots in France in 2005.........and then the staged saga of the Mohamed cartoons in 2006, first in Denmark and then later world wide, where Muslim countries unwittingly participated in a MOSSAD propaganda drive around the subject of "The Clash of Civilizations":

Western backed Islamic fundamentalism to fight local nationalism..100 years back

How the Shah of Iran was toppled and Mullahs installed in his place

Who started the Arc of Crisis policy from the 1970's

Bernard Lewis


....................forgetting the very hard truth that of the 57 Muslim majority countries nearly all of them are pro-Western (closely allied to the USA/UK), with the exception of Iran, Sudan, Somalia and Libya (though I hear Qaddafi is rumored to be planning holidays in the USA, and his children are educated in Western countries.........Qaddafi's son and heir loves cosmopolitan London, where I think he was educated as were many of his other children) ............and the elites of these 57 Muslim countries are pro-Western, depositing a good deal of their wealth and personal assets in Western countries. They send their children to be educated in Western countries. They take their holidays in Western countries. They do their exclusive shopping in Western countries.

In short, where it matters, in terms of Muslim rulers and the elite, the mass of Muslim nations are pro-Western.........."The Clash of Civilization" meme in reality doesn't exist in the critical arena. A few Muslim terrorist groups trained and covertly directed by Western intelligence and Israel does not a make a clash of civilizations, but are useful fifth column excuses for the West to "pursue" and invade Muslim countries.

So for some people the promotion of the meme, with staged artificial theater does help their own perceived agenda's........and the thoughtful, forthright article by Professor James Petras exposes that deep deception, and the real actors involved in the deception, and their consequent motivations.

__________________________________________________

The caricatures in Middle East politics

The center piece of the current explosive confrontation between Islamic and Arab protestors, political leaders and governments and the US and Western European regimes and publishers is rooted in Israeli efforts to polarize the world in its favor and to promote isolation, economic sanctions and/or a military attack on Iran.

An article by James Petras and Robin Eastman-Abaya

There are several key questions, which almost all commentators and analysts have failed to address. These include:

Why did the cartoons get published in Denmark?

What is the political background of Flemming Rose the cultural editor of Jyllands-Posten, who solicited, selected and published the cartoons?

What larger issues coincide with the timing of the cartoons publication and reproduction?

Who benefits from the publication of the cartoons and the ensuing confrontation between the Arabs/Islam and the West?

What is the contemporary political context of the Arab/Islam protests?

How is the Israeli secret service, Mossad, implicated in provoking the Western-Islamic/Arab conflict, and how do the consequences measure up to their expectations?

A starting point for analyzing the cartoon controversy, which has been a focus for attacking Muslims and Muslim countries as intolerant of Western freedom of expression, ........is the long-standing role of Denmark as a major operation point for Mossad activity in Europe. Re-phrased: How could a tiny Scandinavian country of 5.4 million citizens and residents (200,000 or less than 3% of whom are Muslim), renowned for fairy tales, ham and cheese, have become a target for the fury of millions of practicing Muslims from Afghanistan to Palestine, from Indonesia to Libya and into the streets of cities all over the world with significant Muslim populations?

Why, after the bombing of Baghdad, the tortures of Abu Ghariab, the massacres in Fallujah and the utter destitution of the entire Iraqi and Afghan people would Moslems turn their anger at symbols of Denmark from its tinned cookies to its Embassies and overseas business offices?

The story, presented with straight faces, by television news-people, is of, Mr. Flemming Rose, a crusading cultural editor of a widely read Danish daily newspaper who wanted to counter the growing political correctness of Europeans about criticizing Moslems and which he compared to the self-censorship he had witnessed in his native Soviet Union. The oddly named Ukrainian-born editor of the culture page of the Jyllands-Posten commissioned Danish cartoonists to submit a series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed as they (the Danish cartoonists) might imagine him. However four of the twelve cartoons selected for publication were illustrated by Rose's own staff including the most controversial one ;bomb in the turban. Braving Denmark's anti-blasphemy laws Mr. Rose published the cartoons on September 30, 2005 and the rest is history.

A (perceived) huge world wide attack on the West's sacred right to free expression erupted in the Moslem world with millions of shocked Europeans and North Americans rushing to defend their cherished freedoms in this "clash of civilizations".......(well not millions, Prof, just the media milking the situation.......making the issue bigger than it really was....with shades of the Satanic verses theater 16 years earlier.........The American press was restrained and avoided publishing the cartoons, whilst some of the European press were a little bit more bolder, raising the issue in the context of the increasing rise of Muslim immigration into Western Europe, and whether Muslims could really EVER fit into European society as being after all the marginal very different "other").

Syria and Iran were prominently blamed for the stirring up of furious believers in the streets of Damascus and Teheran, Beirut and in the slums of Gaza (How convenient). According to US Secretary Rice, "Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes and the world ought to call them on it." The Pakistani and Libyan authorities allied to the US fired on demonstrators killing and wounding scores while numerous religious leaders were arrested. The Western governments urged their Arab and Moslem allies to prevent more attacks on Danish products and property and blamed those unable to quell the fury with complicity and instigation.

All of this was over a series of cartoons, or so we are told.

The cultural editor, Flemming Rose, who soon tired of being surrounded by a team of Danish police and security to protect him from assassination and missing his daily jogs through his tranquil Copenhagen neighborhood, chose to seek safe haven in Miami, Florida (rather than his native Ukraine among the Cuban exiles, Israeli sayanim and Mah Jong-playing retirees as the drama plays on..........

(anti-Antisemitism is quite high in Ukraine, given its history, and given the fact that it is a THIRD WORLD country where conditions are not so appealing as Miami..............to me the people looked sad and dejected when I was there, .....in an economic mess still 18 years after the fall of Communism; Jews still run the show in Ukraine.....officially 100,000 Jews in the country though the real figure is likely to be higher since the likes of Fleming Rose hide under pseudonyms and local names; many have left like Fleming Rose for the USA or Israel.....Ukrainian women are much sought after in the flesh trade by the Jewish Mafia.........not many immigrants from the Third World in the country, but quite a few Jews in key positions within the state)

Denmark Center of Mossad Activity

Why Denmark? Could this crudely manufactured controversy have been generated on the pages of any major London or New York paper? Who would wish to put Denmark at the center of this clash of civilization appearing as a script from some grade B Islamophobic thriller?

An interesting chapter in former Israeli Mossad agent, Victor J. Ostrovsky's book, By Way of Deception (1990 St. Martin's Press), outlines the close relationship between the workings of the Danish intelligence services and the Israeli Mossad over decades:

"The relationship between the Mossad and Danish intelligence is so intimate as to be indecent. But it is not the Mossad's virtue that is compromised by the arrangement; it's Denmark's. And that's because the Danish are under the mistaken impression that because they saved a lot of Jews in World War II, the Israelis are grateful and they can trust the Mossad."

The Mossad has the capacity to monitor the entire population of Arabs and especially Palestinians (presumably including those with Danish citizenship) through their special relations with the Danes:

" A Mossad man monitors all Arabic and Palestinian-related messages(among Denmarks Arab community) coming into their (the Danish Civil Security Service)headquarters an extraordinary arrangement for a foreign intelligence service."

The Danish Intelligence officers high regard for their Israeli Mossad office mates is apparently not, according to Ostrovsky, reciprocated:

"The Mossad have such contempt for their Danish counterparts that they refer to them as fertsalach, the Hebrew term for a small burst of gas, a fart:..... they tell the Mossad everything they do. Pp. 231-232"

In return for their servility, the Danes get valuable training from the Israelis :

Once every three years, Danish intelligence officials go to Israel for a seminar conducted by the Mossad which generates useful contacts for the Mossad while perpetuating the notion that no organization deals with terrorism better than they (Mossad) do.

In the wake of the US debacle in Iraq and the world's resistance to a massive preemptive military attack or economic and diplomatic embargo of Iran, which could send oil prices to over $100 a barrel, Israel needed to turn the war of ideas on its head. It would make sense that a campaign, aimed to further whip up justifications to attack countries like Iran and Syria (Israel's current enemy du jour), would emanate from one of the US strongest European ally in the invasion and destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan and whose national intelligence apparatus (so fondly known as fertsalach) would be eager to serve Israel's interest.(means, motive and method.....)

Flemming ( or Flaming) Rose: Journalist with a cause

Given Mossad's long-standing penetration of the Danish intelligence agencies, and their close working relations with the right wing media, it is not surprising that
a Ukrainian Jew, operating under the name of Flemming Rose with close working relations with the Israeli state (and in particular the far right Likud regime) should be the center of the controversy over the cartoons. Roses ties to the Israeli state antedate his well-know promotional interview with Daniel Pipes (2004), the notorious Arab-hating Zionist ideologue.

Prior to being placed as a cultural editor of a leading right-wing Danish daily, from 1990 to 1995 Rose was a Moscow-based reporter who translated into Danish a self-serving auto-biography by Boris Yeltsin, godchild of the pro-Israeli, post-communist Russian oligarchs, most of whom held dual citizenship and collaborated with the Mossad in laundering illicit billions. Between 1996-1999 Rose, the journalist, worked the Washington circuit (traveling with Clinton to China) before returning to Moscow 1999-2004 as a reporter for Jyllands-Posten. In 2005 he became its cultural editor, despite few or any knowledge of the field and over the head of other Danish journalists on the staff. In his new position Rose found a powerful platform to incite and play on the growing hostility of conservative Danes to immigrants from the Middle East, particularly practicing Moslems. Using the format of an interview he published Pipes virulent anti-Islamic diatribe, probably to test the waters before proceeding to the next stage in the Mossad strategy to polarize a West-East confrontation.

Political Context for Action

There is a great body of evidence demonstrating that Iraq war was largely a result of a massive disinformation campaign by civilian militarists in the Pentagon and US Zionists in and out of high places in the Pentagon and civil society, in coordination with the Israeli state, which wanted Iraq to be destroyed as a viable nation. ("A Clean Break" 1996......."Project for a New American Century" 2000......The writers and signatories to these key policy papers subsequently holding important positions in the Bush II administration, and especially the Pentagon and Dick Cheney's office ........9/11/ 2001) There is no evidence that the major US oil corporations pressured Congress or promoted the war in Iraq or the current confrontation with Iran. There is plenty of evidence that they are very uneasy about the losses that may result from an Israeli attack on Iran.

The Zionist succeeded in their goals in Iraq: establishing a beachhead in the northern Kurdish enclave (Kurdistan), and securing assets in the new Iraqi regime via Chalabi and others.

The major Jewish organizations mobilized to oppose any critics of the Zionist policymakers, predictably accusing them of anti-Semitism. Nevertheless, over time, FBI investigations, CIA reports and judicial indictments have pointed to key Israeli operatives and their domestic collaborators as Israeli spies. While Israel benefited from the Bush-Blair invasion in Iraq, the same cannot be said for the United States. As thousands of casualties mounted, and war spending skyrocketed to hundreds of billions of dollars, opposition to the war escalated.

Israeli strategic plans to extend US military operations to Iran and Syria faced major challenges, from within the US military and public and even sections of the mass media. Mossad assets in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and elsewhere had to settle for puff pieces on Iran's non-existent nuclear weapon threat, right after the same plot with regard to Iraq was exposed as a total fabrication.

Another line of propaganda was needed to silence war critics and heighten animosities to the Islamists/Arabs in general and Iran in particular. This is where the Flemming Rose-Mossad operation came into the picture. The Islamic-hate cartoons were published in Denmark in September 2005 as Israeli and US Zionists escalated their war propaganda against Iran. The initial response from the Islamic countries however was limited. The story wasn't picked up in the International Herald Journal until late December 2005. By early January 2006, Mossad /Katsas (Hebrew for case officers) activated sayanim (volunteer Jewish collaborators outside of Israel) throughout Western and Eastern European media to simultaneously reproduce the cartoons on Feb. 1 and 2, 2006. One such sayanim operation would have been the decision by France-Soir Senior Editor, Arnaud Levy and Editor in Chief Serge Faubert, to publish the cartoons. The paper's French Egyptian owner almost immediately fired the paper's Managing Editor, Jacques Lefranc, who, according to an interview with CNN, had initially opposed their publications, without touching Levy and Faubert.

A strident campaign was launched in practically all the pro-Western mass media condemning the initial, relatively moderate Islamic protests, which had occurred between September to December 2005 and rapidly provoked the subsequent massive escalation, doubtlessly aided by covert Mossad operatives among Arab populations. Mossad's little farts, the Danish intelligence fanned the fires by advising Denmark's rightwing Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen not to give way by refusing to apologize as the pro-Western Arab regimes requested and even refusing a request for a meeting with a group of Denmark-based diplomats from Arab and Moslem countries to discuss the situation.

Flemming Rose-Mossad tried one more gambit to further heighten East-West tension. He publicly offered to publish any Iranian cartoons which would mock the Holocaust in his paper. The senior editor of Jyllands-Posten, apparently belatedly caught on to Flemming Rose hidden agenda and vetoed the offer and asked Rose to take a leave of absence. Rose left for Miami, not Tel Aviv where his residency might raise suspicions about his claim to be merely an opponent of self-censorship. In Miami, he no doubt will have the protection of the locally based sayanin, armed and train for self-defense of threatened Zionists.

Sayanim : Defenders of Western Civilization

The sayanim, derived, according to Victor Ostrovsky, from the Hebrew word "to help" are a huge world-wide network of Jews in strategic or useful places (real estate, mass media, finance, car dealerships etc) who have been agreed to help in Israeli Mossad activities within their own countries. This has been ascribed to the supra-national loyalty sayanim offer to Israel, above and not always in the interest of their home country. According to Gordon Thomas and Martin Dillon, in their detailed biography, Robert Maxwell, Israel's Super spy (Carroll and Graf Publishers, 2002), the notorious media mogul, Robert Maxwell, was a super-sayanim, providing cover, offices, political connections, money-laundering services and planted stories in the service of Israel at the Mossad"s behest. Jonathan Pollard, the American Naval Researcher jailed for espionage, is another notorious sayanim.

The activities of these helpers really range from the spectacular to the more mundane and, according to Victor Ostrovsky, in his 1990 biography "By Way of Deception", the sayanim represent a pool of thousands of active and inactive individuals who can provide services discretely out of loyalty to the cause of Israel as defined by any current Mossad operation. The cynicism of this arrangement is clear: It makes little difference to the Mossad if an operation, such as Flemming Rose, jeopardizes the national and economic interests of the sayanim's own country and , if exposed, might harm the status of Jews in the diaspora. The standard response from the Mossad would be: "So what's the worst that could happen to those Jews. They's all come to Israel. Great." This recklessness clearly has ramifications for Jews who have refused to be recruited as Mossad helpers in affected countries.

Mossad War Propaganda and the Cartoon Controversy.

Israeli leaders expressed their opposition to the Bush Administration's diplomatic efforts to engage the European powers in the Iran negotiations. Automatically and without question all the major Zionist and Jewish organizations in the US (AIPAC, Presidents of the Major Jewish Organizations, ADL and others) unleashed a sustained national campaign to mobilize congress and their friends in the executive branch to take immediate military action or to impose economic sanctions on Iran. The Bush Administration however while in agreement, lacked public support in the US and among his European allies and their national electorates. The Mossad policy was to create a pretext to polarize public opinion between the Middle East (and beyond) and the West in order to escalate tensions and demonize Islamic adversaries to its Middle East hegemonis pretensions. Rose cartoons served the Mossad perfectly.

The issue could be presented as a free speech issue, a conflict of values not interests, between the democratic West and the fundamentalist totalitarian (as characterized by Pipes-Rose) Islamists. Nothing could be further from the truth. Rose had solicited and selected the Islamic caricatures while his paper had rejected similar cartoons of Jesus Christ in an earlier context. The image of Rose as a cultural iconoclast - while working for a right wing daily whose daily fare was publishing anti-(Mid-East)immigrant news stories and favorable interviews with Zionists extremists - is prima facie not credible, although that image has been purveyed by all the major media outlets. While Rose initiated the international tensions, liberal and neo-con colleagues and his comrades in and out of the Mossad publicized his transgressions and provoked the ire of the Arab and Islamic world.

The cartoons, the subsequent insults and calumnies attacking the Islamic protestors and their secular allies throughout Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Europe eventually provoked major peaceful and then violent protests by millions of people.

Visual images of violent protests and demonstrations were featured by the Western mass media, successfully creating the intended fear and apprehension against Muslim countries and minorities in Europe. Islamophobia gained momentum. Zionist propagandists in Europe and the US linked the defense of free speech issue to Israeli security policies. While the West turned its fury against the Islamic protestors, Israel blockaded Gaza and the US and Europe cut off all funding to the Palestinians, threatening the population with mass starvation for exercising its democratic right to elect its own leaders!

Rose's free speech charade revived the discredited ZionCon doctrine of Clash of Civilizations.

Playing on European Islamophobia and the increasing sensibility of practicing Moslems and Arab nationalists to Western abuses, it is likely that Israeli psych-war experts pinpointed the free speech issue as the ideal detonator for the conflict.

The democratic electoral victory of Hamas dubbed by Israel as a terrorist movement accelerated Israeli efforts to convince Western governments to insist that regimes in Muslim countries repress the irrational Islamic masses or face Western censure or elimination of aid. (The failure to crack down violently on demonstrators was presented by the media as official approval or instigation) The major US Zionist organizations were able to influence Secretary of State Rice into blaming Iran and Syria for fomenting the worldwide demonstrations, from Gaza to the Philippines. The Israeli strategy was to use European outrage to weaken opposition to a military attack or economic sanctions on Iran and Syria.

Beyond Religious Blasphemy

While most establishment analysts have narrowly focused on the cartoon as the source and target of the massive global demonstrations, in fact it is at best the immediate detonator of a whole series of ongoing events of much greater political significance. From the shock and awe carpet bombing of Iraq, to the mass torture and routine everyday humiliation in occupied countries, from the utter destruction of Fallujah (an American example as Guernica was for the Nazis), to Israeli devastation of Jenin and Palestine, from the everyday assassinations of Palestinians by the Israeli occupiers, to the smearing of the Koran with filth at Guantanamo, Israel, the US and Europe have attempted to demonstrate that no Moslems are safe anywhere- not in their schools, home, offices, fields, factories or mosques- and that nothing is sacred.

The reasons that millions are demonstrating against a caricature of Mohammed published in an insignificant Scandinavian rightwing newspaper is that this is the last straw the detonator of a series of deliberate violations of fundamental social and political rights of Muslim, Arab and colonized peoples. While the Western media have focused exclusively on the religious content of the demonstrators, almost every country, where massive sustained demonstrations have taken place, has been subject to recent Western intervention, large-scale pillage of raw materials and/or experienced the destruction of their secular rights: countries invaded, homes, schools, hospital, systems of health and clean water demolished, agriculture and natural resources looted, museums, libraries and archeological sites pillaged and mosques desecrated.

The present condition for material existence has been a Western inferno for all the people (both secular and observant) living in Arab or Islamic countries. Now their most profound, historic, spiritual reference point, the prophet Mohammed the most cherished religious figure has been repeatedly trampled with impunity by arrogant imperialists, their media servants, aided and abetted by the Israeli state and its overseas sayanin operatives. It is cynical to suggest that practicing Moslems could desecrate the figure of Jesus Christ with impunity when that too is forbidden by the Koran.

As the Israeli strategists well knew in advance, the vilification of Islam was not taking place in a political vacuum: The material conditions for an Islamic-Arab uprising were ripe: Hamas had swept the Palestinian elections, the US military were aware that they were losing the war in Iraq, Iran was refusing to capitulate, Bush was losing public support for ongoing and future Middle Eastern wars, AIPAC, Israel's main political instrument for influencing US policy was under criminal investigation. Israel's strategy of having the US fight its wars was boomeranging. There was a need to revive the political-military tensions which they had exploited after September 11, 2001 to Israel's advantage: hence the Flemming Rose provocation, hence the coordinated, wide promotion of the act, hence the free speech agitation among Western sayanin, liberals, conservatives and neocon ideologues, hence the predictable explosion of protest, hence the recreation of Mid-East tension and the advances of Israel's agenda.

Clearly the burgeoning confrontation is more than a religious or free speech issue, more than the crude provocations of an errant cultural editor coddled by the "little farts" of a penetrated Danish intelligence agency. What is at stake is the deliberate racist stereotyping of Arab, Islamic and Third World people in order to sustain and deepen their oppression, exploitation and subordination.

The most pervasive, prolific and influential source of racist Arab stereotypes are Israel and its overseas (particularly US and European) academics, terror "experts", psychologists at the most prestigious universities and think tanks, who have provided the "psychological profile" to torture, humiliate, provoke and repress the millions struggling for self-determination against colonial and imperial dominance.

Once again Israel and especially its overseas operatives have placed the expansion and militarist interests of Israel above the interests of the people of the US and Europe. Is it good for the Jews?: A criterion as defined by the Israeli state, has led to the blind alley of massive confrontations, deepening animosity between Arabic/Muslim peoples and Western regimes.

What appeared so clever to the Roses of the world and their Katsas and docile Sayanim, in provoking confrontation may once again boomerang: The uprisings may go beyond protesting symbols of vilification to attacking the substance of power, including the Arab and Moslem pro-consuls and collaborators of the Euro-American political and economic power. While the Mossad is very astute in infiltrating and provoking oppressed groups, it has been singularly inept in controlling and containing the resultant uprisings as the recent victory of Hamas demonstrates and the success of the Iraqi resistance illustrates.

The next controversial cartoon may show Moses leading his people into the desert.

Epilogue

While the Mossad-provoked "free speech versus blasphemy" controversy between the West and the Islamic peoples continues to deepen, Israel proceeds to impose a Nazi-like economic siege over 4 million Palestinians, intended to starve them into surrendering their democratic freedoms. Intended is the concise term, Gideon Levy, star reporter for the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz (19/02/06) records Dov Weissglas, advisor to the Israeli Prime Minister, jokingly telling top officials "Its (the economic blockage which may include electricity and water, as well as food) like an appointment with a dietician. The Palestinians will get a lot thinner but won't die." The Israeli officials rolled with laughter.

As Levy points out more than half of all Palestinians are already living in poverty last year 37 had difficulties obtaining food 54% of the residents of Gaza cut back the amount of food they consume; child mortality rose by 15% unemployment reached 28%. Planned pre-meditated mass starvation of a ghettoized population, jokingly discarded by its executioners as "a visit to the dietician", is an exact replica of the internal policy discussion of the Nazi high command over the population in the Warsaw Ghetto. Israel's capacity to impose and implement a genocidal policy has been greatly facilitated by the symbolic sideshow, which the Mossad-Rose orchestrated in Western Europe. "Cultural" conflict at the service of genocide is hardly a clever ruse or merely a violation of Islamic sensibilities, it is a crime against humanity.

_____________________________________________________

The original article is HERE.

Let there be no silence before history repeats itself.

.
.
.
.
.














Comrade Genrikh Yagoda



Criticism, conversation between individuals and reflective thinking are the foundations and bedrock of civilization. The obvious unstated truths, which most of us understand.

When governments legislate against this basic right, under the guise of political correctness...........it invariably constitutes a threat to the basic advancement of civilization; that simple.

A particular cabal wish to advance their interests, and they require an unquestioning public to follow their policies without question, without arguments, without reflection, without criticism or any intervening conversation between individuals.

Hurry, hurry hurry, shut your mouth and follow the orders..............indeed this must be the organizational ethos of most Mafia groups around the world, operating within a highly inflexible Pyramid, North African power structure.

But let us compare this modern standard with past leaders in history who ran regimes or otherwise which most people agreed were incorruptible and wholesome.

How would George Washington deal with somebody if they accused him of being a traitor to the King, and a criminal rebel................depending on who said it, and how it was said, and when it was said, and where it was said.............he might well laugh and shrug it off.........or grimace, and make an appropriate terse retort..............or choose to totally ignore it and not dignify it, if uttered by a nonentity, which has no connection to reality and the truth.

And if somebody accused Gandhi in person of being a coolie demagogue; a half naked fakir..........I could well imagine him smile gently, and try and engage the person who made such a remark. Why would somebody say such a thing?

For the great and the good such slanders and criticisms are like water off a ducks back.....there is conceivably no basis for such things so why take them seriously?.................Why give them additional credit by over reacting against them?

For a certified hardcore criminal, whether as an individual or within a cabal the opposite is true. Any and all criticism, unfair and the balanced ones must be made illegal....the full weight of the law must be applied.....nobody must criticize them.....they are above the law.

This is exactly what happened in the Soviet Union after October 1918, when the Bolsheviks took over. One of the very first acts they passed was to make criticism of Jews a crime....................you could be sent to the gulag..............or you could simply be executed.

WHY?

Well we may get some answers by reflecting and taking a critical look at Soviet history.

1. We know many people died when the Russian Czarist empire came under Soviet rule....according to Alexander Solzhenitsyn as many as 60 million people may have perished between 1918--1991. The emergency rule of the early years; forced collectivization; Holmidor in the Ukraine.......and the great purges of the 1930's ........and so on.....and so on.

2. We know from Jewish sources that a high percentage of the Soviet Communist apparatus were run by Jews, professing to be secular Communists with often Russified Slavic names....and that possibly Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev may themselves had Jewish lineage.

3. We know that not one Synagogue was destroyed in the Soviet Union, but many churches and some mosques were destroyed, whilst under Bolshevik atheist rule.

4. We know that nearly ALL the victims of the Soviet penal system were non-Jewish.........most were innocent people who had been caught up in the evil brutal Bolshevik system of the Soviet Union.

5. We know the Soviet Union had an international agenda to spread their ideology to ALL parts of the world, once it was consolidated in the Soviet Union, through force of arms where necessary.

6. We know that the Soviet Jewish experiment was funded by Banks based in New York, a core of the leadership led by Trotsky based and nurtured in New York, sailed from there to start the Soviet revolution in 1917.

7. We know Jewish financial houses in New York played a pivotal role in the strategic industrialization of the Soviet Union.......making it the second greatest industrial power after America. We know that this close relationship continued into the so called hoax of the "Cold war".

8. We know that the Cuban missile Crisis took place in 1962, where purportedly the two super powers came close to a nuclear war.

The ordinary Soviets were denied their fundamental right to question their leaders, and policies....................and the end result was 73 years of dire misery and phenomenal mistakes by the Soviet Union....in all spheres of life.........if a problem was uncovered whether in the political, economic or strategic sphere it was hushed up, lest the "weaknesses" of the Soviet Socialist paradise be exposed to the Capitalist West to ridicule.

And so as the security is tightened in the USA, and UK under a Jewish agenda driven philosophy and strategy, people living in those two Great countries must be aware; they must be alert......for history can repeat itself....where in 2005, not that far away in the near past the head of the KGB/FSB, Yevgeny Primakov (Jewish), and the head of the East German Stasi, Markus Wolf (retired to Israel)...............came to the USA to advise the Homeland Security Department how to operate more effectively.

Stalin's Jews:"We mustn't forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish"

Communism is a Social Catastrophe

Gulag Archipelago

Comrade Yezhov

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2008/07/stalins-jews.html

The Kashmir Declaration.

.
.
.
.
It is dawn, and the PM ManMohan Singh lands at an undisclosed location somewhere in Kashmir. He is accompanied by most members of the cabinet, heads of the armed forces and senior civil servants following his entourage..........................The PM drives on along with his entourage towards the LoC.

There at the LoC they stop, and slowly disembark from their vehicles gradually, and the illustrious entourage head towards the LoC. At the LoC a huge white tent has already been erected, half in India, half in Pakistan Kashmir. Standing by the tent is PM Gilani who had arrived a little earlier, and his entourage of senior military and cabinet officers, including Gen. Kiyani and Gen. Suja Pasha.

The two PM's shake hands....and exchange pleasenteries....."so good seeing you again"..."The weather is beautiful"......"I feel today is a historic day for all South Asia"...."I think so too".........."62 years is enough time for neighboring countries both of which are now democracies to be able to sort out their problems....peacefully, constructively and maturely"......."Yes indeed".

The two men then proceed into the tent........and sign the "Kashmir Declaration"...a document very simple in its objectives, but profound in its implications:


__________________________________

The Kashmir Declaration.

.

.

1. The present boundary and LoC between India and Pakistan in relation to Jammu & Kashmir, and the Northern areas will henceforth be recognised as the defacto international boundaries of the two countries. This agreement does not cover Askai Chin and other disputed boundaries in Eastern Kashmir.

.

2. All areas of control by the two parties to this declaration in relation to all Jammu & Kashmir under control by India and Pakistan respectively are henceforth treated as sovereign territories of the two respective countries, the fact of which is not to be disputed by either party at any domestic or international forum by government officers and elected government officials of the two respective parties.

.

3. The two parties to this declaration, namely India and Pakistan will enhenceforth sincerely and diligently, in good faith as neighbors avoid any attempts at interference in the internal affairs of their respective countries, particularly in relation to Kashmir.

.

4. Any intervening problems that do arise in relation to ALL Jammu Kashmir under Indian and Pakistani control in the future, must be addressed bilaterally, without the intervention of Third Parties in the spirit of good faith, through clearly established inter state mechanism to be established through negotiations in the future, be they diplomatic, military, intelligence or the police.

.

5. The declaration is a broad statement within the context of international customary law to establish a general platform upon which future negotiations between the two nations, over Jammu Kashmir can move forward in relation to the fine details of a future comprehensive agreement between the two countries in a mutual atmosphere of amicable, constructive cooperation which leads to more a comprehensive binding agreement in the future.

____________________________________________

Indian Public figures visiting America.

.
.
.
.












When I heard about George Fernandez, as visiting Indian defense secretary being strip searched by American airport authorities in DC and another place twice in 2002 and 2003, and I thought....nah...must be April fools.....then ex-President Kalam is ID frisked on an American airline on his way to India more recently.......then the same to Azim Premji apparently, the billionaire IT businessman who is also a celebrity in India......Aameer Khan strip searched too in Chicago 2002, the most creative of new wave Hindi movie actors and directors........and finally SRK questioned for 66 minutes about certain unknown matters.......SRK says 2 hours, and that his name had triggered the questioning for 2 hours........"Is you name Khan" ....."Yes"....."Where are you from"......."India".............2 hours of this?.........Do all Khans from around the world who visit the USA go through this for 2 hours?........................Muslim name of Central Asian origin that originates from Ghengiz Khan.............and is a very popular name for Muslim's in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.

Could you imagine the Russian defense secretary being strip searched??? Or the Brazilian defense secretary?? Of course not..........there would be serious diplomatic repercussion; diplomatic expulsions....and so on. Brazil has already responded like with like.....reciprocity, "OK gringo you fingerprint our nationals visiting America, so we fingerprint your nationals visiting our country."

So the explanation?

Often this mistreatment against Indian public figures is explained in terms of 9/11 and the new "situation" in America.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FG14Df05.html

But I do not accept this, since presumably all other senior government figures from around the world of 192 nations should also logically be treated the same way as Fernandez. But there isn't a deluge of stories around this happening to other Public officials in other countries.

Because of Islamic names.................George Fernandez an Islamic name? Azim Premji stands out as an Islamic name?

Could it be simple racism? Yes but again there are many brown people countries, great and small around the world, and one does not hear stories of ill-treatment at airports against such people.

So what is going on?

___________________________________

1. Cases of this kind does not appear to happen to senior officials, and public figures of other nations great and small........unique to Indian Public Figures ONLY......of obvious public status, usually involving men who are clearly near retirement stage...........Grey hair, frail in the case of some....old, .................we are not talking of 20 something, 30 something stooges/patsies of Western intelligence out to do harm to little defenseless ole America.

2. Could be a simple issue of racism......brown country....though one should add that the USA will become a brown country by 2050, and is already a considerable mutli-racial society (34% non-European). But it does not seem to happen to important public figures of other brown country peoples, the bigger nations or the smaller ones....so whats up?

3. Some sections of American society are envious of India's rising status within the global society both as a military power, and an economic power, and by doing such things it is an expression of their dislike, and frustration at the gradual rise to prominence of India as a significant nation in the world............equally significant that these things have been happening very recently as in the last few years, in parallel with the rise of India's profile in the world........

Explanation number 3 seems to be most likely.

___________________________________

What to do:

1. Foreign secretary Kishna Menon should send a very strong letter to the State Department expressing India's concern about such events, and clarifies that such events should not be repeated in the future, EVER. The American ambassador to Delhi should be called to the foreign ministry, and the full list of public figures humiliated should be recounted to him, asking him to explain why such events take place only against Indian Public figures on American soil.

2. There should be greater liaison between the Indian Embassy in the USA, and the future prospective visits of VIP figures from India. In all cases a visiting VIP from India should be met at the airport by a significant officer from the Indian embassy DC, or where practical consul officials..........they do not need to meet directly with the Indian VIP, but such a person should be in the vicinity of the airport. Such an embassy/consulate person should be at the airport in advance before the VIP arrives, and makes relevant contact with airport authorities in the USA, and inform them that such and such VIP is arriving by such an such airline.

3. There has been talk of "reciprocity" by some Indian officials but that would be silly, and counter productive. The USA is a complicated country with various power group elites......a few like India and see that there are pragmatic practical reasons to have good relations with the country, hence the recent warm up of relations. But some do not like India, hence the silly antics against the likes of George Fernandez, ex-President Abdul Kalam and more recently the Bollywood star Shah Rukh Khan.

This animosity by sections of American elite can be alternatively expressed via covert/overt help to Pakistan, India's perennial nuisance failed neighbor....controlled by America......."netaji and babuji you can stop wasting your breath directing complaints against Pakistani public figures, most are puppets of the USA.......Pakistan military...ISI"; $23 billion overall aid package promised under the Obama regime, and military assistance which invariably end up targeting India.

According to some sources the American embassy in Islamabad is a military base right next to the Presidential palace, parliament and other sensitive Pakistani establishments....containing 800 staff, the second biggest after Bagdad, and will be increased to 1,100??........that they are building a huge new compound next to the Presidential Palace, at $500 million...can it be verified?.......That Kiyani has taken over foreign policy, and Zardari focuses on looting..20% by now. And in Afghanistan, the type of regime America runs there, mostly criminals into narcotics.

.

The thing is Netaji/Babuji from a holistic perspective it is not about getting all worked up with the operations of the LeT, Huj, ....names which no doubt all Indians are familiar with,...... but pondering over what precisely is the fundamental nature of the Pakistani state and its REAL power structure, which allow such extremist illegal entities to come into India and do harm, and who exactly runs such a failed state in the final analysis.

.
My assertin is that America runs Pakistan, and especially the Pakistan military and ISI. Once this is grasped then a different approach can be formulated by India in relation to Pakistan.....because it looks very silly the site of Indian politicians prennially complaining to the Pakistanis to do this that and the other; the Pakistani promising to do this that and the other...........but in reality never really changing their ways........in such a scenario it makes India look pathetic, ineffective and sorry......rather in the way Indian Public figures are humiliated when they rather hopefully visit America.

.
........and China, investing heavily in the country, including providing it with strategic help, such that the country is now the greatest industrial power in the world..........500 million ton steel production, and 3500 billion kWT electric generation, and the second largest economic power measured by PPP.....at around $10,000 billion economy, just behind the USA $14,000 billion. Finally, providing various incentives and concessions to Chinese firms (MFN status) to export to the USA, usually at the expense of USA firms--------such economic Hari-Kiri by America can only be described in terms of ideological dogmatism, which trumps plain simple village common sense. Which elite groups are we talking about? Neo-liberals belonging to the American "left" Rockefeller's, Brzezinski, Clinton's.....and so forth........Plus groups of Jews around New York see Communism as an extension, and progression of the Jewish religion......Communism is "their" creation.

.

So thats why International Jewish finance and investments are pouring into North Korea, Cuba and Vietnam???!!!!! Pure ideological dogma is not the only factor influencing International Jewish finance, but is a major factor directed by their percieved private tribal needs. That is why Israel is a major conduit for sensitive American military technology into China......which then inadvertantly go to North Korea, Pakistan and Iran............nobody said any ideology, especially Jewish ones had to make sense......but its there, and it exists. One should know about it, without the benefit of reading its details emanating from the State Department.

.

International Jewish finance, and Capital also operate in the real world of commerce and competition sometimes, though through their control of finance in certain key countries (USA/UK/Switzerland/France?Germany?/Holland?) they tend to promote themselves more then other gentile businesses...........but in not investing in Cuba, or North Korea, or Vietnam they also have to take into account, political, and economic considerations before they invest in that Socialist country enmasse, in line with their ideological/tribal beliefs.

.
Friendship/love is a strange thing, and it can be variously expressed by individials or groups of people towards their object of affection........sometimes taking an antagonistic approach to the percieved enemy of the original object of affection. Though of course from a historical perspective and in many other respects India and China have been at peace with each other for thousands of years.........it is only with the introduction of dogmatic Jewish Communism, that China has adopted a negative policy towards India since the 1960's.....into the present, via Pakistan, Nepal, Myanmar.

.

India has not fully scummbed to any Jewish ideology, like China. Though India did toy with Socialism, and is a parliamentary democracy which is not an Indian ideology....(Anglo-Saxon model from England) and most of its laws are inherited from the British. But never the less for all the foreign ideological imports of India in all spheres of life, India through its unique "Indian" Independence movement under Gandhi and his philosophy, and its present day style of politics still manages to an extent maintain an Indian face in the philosophical base of its national character........that cannot be said for China, where Marx, Lenin, Stalin's names are chanted by the masses in equal adulation to Mao Tse Tung.

.

We do not know what the role of Qui Ja boards, sacred numbers and private soothsayers play in all this.....to be sure when you have enjoyed privilege over generations and amassed billions of $ mostly illegal, then it is not impossible to enter into a bubble of fantasy and strange ideological worlds, which logically do not favor your own country, but to you seems so logical.

Therefore when Clinton talks about making India to a "great power" and enters India via Mumbai, be on full state alert )

India should diplomatically and pragmatically reach out to those who are Indophiles in the USA, and ignore and avoid the obvious baiting games of those who do not like India. That such things should happen to Indians who have a penchant and love of visiting the USA should be a sobering and enlightening thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indomania

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indology

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/005900.html

MI-5 and the British far right.

.

.

Someone asked me naively/defensively/almost accusative to prove the links between MI-5 and British Far-Right groups and agitators. In normal social interactions and conversations “proving” all your assertions is not necessary….its merely a perspective, an opinion on an issue……whether believed or otherwise. Conversation would be very stale if we had to reference all our points of view.

It is taken as given for those who belong to the activist progressive class, and who are sufficiently informed that there are clear linkages between MI-5 and the Far Right in the UK.

Identifying this linkage is very important in understanding the dynamics of British politics…….and the underlying motivations around such extremist events which recently took place in Birmingham.

I watch Spooks on the beeb, and I know how they really are, trust me is not enough.

MI-5 and the Far-Right:

From: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5060

"As a result of information acquired by the BBC under the Freedom of Information Act MI5 were using undercover agents to spy on the Anti-Apartheid Movement in the 1980s. This information only adds to the evidence that the MI5 has always been under the control of the far right.

This has been true since 1907 when Major Vernon Kell become Director of the Home Section of the Secret Service Bureau with responsibility for investigating espionage, sabotage and subversion within and outside Britain. Later the organisation became known as Military Intelligence (MI5). Kell and his men exclusively targeted left-wing activists.

By 1918 MI5 had files on 137,500 individuals. This included trade unionists, members of the Independent Labour Party and those who had campaigned for peace negotiations during the First World War.

In October 1924 the MI5 intercepted a letter written by Grigory Zinoviev, chairman of the Comintern in the Soviet Union. This investigation eventually became known as the Zinoviev Letter Scandal. Zinoviev’s letter urged British communists to promote revolution through acts of sedition. After consulting Basil Thomson at Special Branch, Kell showed the letter to Ramsay MacDonald, the Labour Prime Minister. Kell told MacDonald that MI5 and the Special Branch were convinced the letter was genuine.

It was agreed that the letter should be kept secret but someone leaked news of the letter to The Times and the Daily Mail. The letter was published in these newspapers four days before the 1924 General Election and contributed to the defeat of Ramsay MacDonald and the Labour Party. After the election it was claimed that two of MI5’s agents, Sidney Reilly and Arthur Maundy Gregory, had forged the letter and had been involved in leaking it to the press.

This did not stop the Labour Party being elected to power five years later. This time MI5 used a different strategy for dealing with the growth in socialism. It is the same strategy they have used ever since. You “turn” the leaders of the labour movement. Ramsay MacDonald was only the first leader turned in this way. Others, like Tony Blair, were recruited early in their political career.

In 1925 Vernon Kell appointed Maxwell Knight as Director of Intelligence of the British Fascists (BF). Knight played a significant role in helping to defeat the General Strike in 1926 and by the early 1930s was placed in charge of B5b, a unit that conducted the monitoring of political subversion.

The vast majority of Knight’s agents were part-time. Knight recruited a large number of his agents from right-wing political organizations such as the Nordic League, British Union of Fascists and the Right Club. This included William Allen and William Joyce who was later to become known as Lord Haw Haw in Nazi Germany.

The KGB used this against MI5 by getting their agents such as Kim Philby and Guy Burgess to join right-wing organizations that were working with Maxwell Knight. They were recruited as neo-fascists when in reality they were devout communists."

http://members.lycos.co.uk/mere_pseud_mag_ed/History/Hope1.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_Knight

You don’t have to trudge the history books of Brum Central Library (A most excellent library for research and study), to get an understanding of the subject.

You grow up in the UK, and you come across skin heads and their type. If you are reasonably perceptive you grasp who they are and what they are in the scheme of things, as a reasonably informed Asian growing up in Britain. Your awareness of the subject heightens when you inadvertently cross paths with British security. Of course it doesn’t automatically make you an expert on the subject, BUT YOU KNOW,…..then you talk with other people, lecturers, social activists, and fellow students…..you witness their activity at university…beating up Asian students etc(1994/5 UCE)…and you gain more first hand knowledge of the area.

Then you visit the CRE as it was known then in 1998 in Alpha Tower, and go out to dinner with them, and they fill you in on more inside information of what was going on, and paper cuttings of interesting events and so forth. No startling facts, all taken as matter of fact because you are desensitized to such things, and in the scheme of things you have bigger issues to worry about.

Never an area that I really focused on, but any certified activist leftie (of which I am not part of) should know of the linkages between MI-5 and the British Far Right Movement, and if you do not know, then you know nothing about the leftie movement and its multiple challenges in the 21st century.

Western politics has fundamentally shifted to the right, and lefties are struggling to “accommodate” this fundamental shift……..and that this fundamental shift is headed by the dynamics and perceived interests of Israeli politics, and the necessary awkwardness the significant number of Jewish lefties feel in realigning themselves with the perspectives of Israel…..........Does one follow the tribe? Or ones life long ideology? Difficult stuff for many I imagine.

MI-5_____BNP,NF,Combat 18,EDL

German intelligence__________Neo-fascists, NDP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_Germany

SISMI__________Forza Nouva http://kirkunity.blogspot.com/2009/08/convicted-italian-fascist-roberto-fiore.html

MIT_____________Grey Wolves http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Wolves

ISI______________Razakars, and al-badr units and annex's of the Pakistan military in East Pakistan; Afghan Mujaheddin....usually of the worst extremist sort, sidelining the moderate ones; the Taliban.....LeT....Huj..and so on...amd so on. These groups often change their names,and reinvent themselves just like in the UK.

RAW_____________Siv Sena/RSS.

VEVAK___________Basij (they carry chains and knives, and attack decent Iranian citizens who dare to protest about any government policies…..like the above they attack ordinary citizens who criticize the government,….except they have beards, some of them…..impressionable village boy youths with not much education, but a lot of ideology, and pent up anger….works closely with the Revolutionary Guard)

By posting these I do not say that this is the norm we live in and we must accept this linkage, as the norm. No why should we…..we must expect better…..but for those who are naive this is the reality of our present situation, and it allows us to look at the situation from a more realistic perspective….the mask at the ball is taken off.

So why the riots now in Brum.............the culmination of a natural process? What natural process? The economic meltdown maybe, and people feeling the effects of the recession, or just angry young men venting their feelings against the obvious targets?

As alluded such anti-social events rarely happen by themselves, spontaneously, but must be observed in the context of other forces within the state structure, and the motivations of the power elite. This can be observed in the context of the 1970's, and the activities of the far right then.

(i) Is all this to get the Tories elected....1974-79 redux leading to Thatcher, or April 2001 Oldham just before the elections. The Tories are 18 points ahead, so do they really need further "assistance" in such an area, in this manner. Maybe somebody wants to make sure they win the next elections......based on a Sarkozy election strategy. It worked for him.

(ii) Possibly now that the economy is going pear shaped, the net result of that will be a lot of angry people asking questions as to who, how, why what, when.......etc, and the BANKERS in "The City" don't want to be the obvious answer to all those questions, as to why Britain is in such a mess. The Circus of Brum provides an useful distraction from their failure and greed. The ordinary people of Britain will be less focused in asking why they are having to bail out the bankers.

(iii) The Blood sacrifice of Iraqis and the Afghan Heroin is profitable for "The City" ..........the Opium and Heroin trades association with "The City" goes back 250 years to the East India company, where Opium was harvested in India and exported to China if you remember your history.

.

The British forces are in Afghanistan purely and simply to ensure that the Heroin is properly shipped to British shores............................BRITAIN IS A STATE OF THE ART SECURITY STATE (bins are tagged, with more cctv's than any other country), AND A WELL SECURED ISLAND...................to import massive amounts of narcotics in such an "unique" country you require the COOPERATION of port authorities, HM Customs & Excise, the police naturally and the intelligence services, part of whose job is to combat organized crime and narcotics.........and naturally as a result of this "unique" security Heroin and narcotics are cheaper than ever in the UK.

Unlike the East India company the Afghan Heroin is coming into the UK, and not sold to some Third World country where the profits are made..............it is harming British people, harming British children, it is also fueling crime and many anti-social behavior which consequently the British tax payer must deal with.

.

How many people in the UK are effected by all this elaborately organised criminality? 500,000? 5,000,000? Who can say?

.

The British military is one of the highest regarded institutions in the UK..................The Opium wars happened 150 years ago, and people have forgotten, so how does one come to the realisation that the British military is merely a pimp force for London based criminals with titles like Baron, Lord and Sirs operating in the "The City" and Barclays?

.

Maybe just easier to switch on the telly, and watch the angst ridden and souless caricature characters of EastEnders to make us feel comfortable, and not think about such "silly" esoteric issues as whether state institutions which the tax payer pays for actually work for the United Kindom, or as unquestioning annex's of criminals in the "The City".........The UK is rich so whats the problem? Things work in the UK so whats the problem?

.

Unlike the East India company and their Opium trade, an elaborate facade has been erected to justify the British presence in Afghanistan........because we live in a modern democracy where allegedly government policies take account of Public sympathies. The East India Company never had to bother with that..............they were selling "goods" to coolies in the East, never to be seen through the media for a good profit for London. If the Coolies objected to such a trade, then you sent British warships and the British army to make sure the coolies made the right decision, through the first and second Opium wars.

.

Britain is now fighting a modern Opium war in Afghanistan, 150 years after the original Opium wars, propping up criminal unpopular election rigged regimes in the process in Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, though strangely the war is termed a war against the Taliban.............a local militia of a few thousand armed with AK-47, created by the USA from 1994 via the ISI, and has NEVER won a single engagement against the narco criminal occupation forces.

.

To win any war especially against a modern well equipped adversary you require air cover, and heavy equipment such as artillery, tanks, mortar, AA, missiles and sophisticated C & C network to coordinate you campaign, and these the Taliban simply do not have.......but here we are 8 years later fighting a colonial narco war, where the Taliban allegedly is getting better and more powerful in Afghanistan and Pakistan, without the essentials of modern war just mentioned above.

.

In a fantasy movie the Taliban could win, or according to the news media, but not in the real world of professional training, organisation, logistics, C&C, advanced heavy equipment and good leadership, the abscence of which the Taliban can never win, but provide a useful justification for the presence of foreign troops on Afghan soil, whilst the Heroin is harvested for them.

.

So what are we saying, the Afghan Mujaheddin did not win against the Soviets then?

.

The Soviet forces withdrew after 9 years of bitter fighting, and had in the end suffered 20,000 dead or MIA, and 40,000 wounded...and a collapsing economy at home which could no longer sustain the war.

.

The Afghan mujaheddin were then backed by the USA, UK, Pakistan, Israel....ALL training up to 90,000 Mujaheddin...and 12,000 Arabs.......with huge logistics, and financial backing to the tune of $20---30 billion from Gulf countries.....the Afghan Mujaheddin also had some heavy equipment and some aircover.

.

The present Afghan/Pakistan Taliban by contrast do not have this kind of backing....and consequently the Western narco forces have suffered about 800 casualities in 8 years of "fighting" thus far, not enough to encourage them to call it a day.

.

So whats up?

.

Whats the real game here?

.

Obviously the Taliban represent a useful justification as "controlled opposition" for the occupation forces to be in Afghanistan, and talkng them up unrealistically is one rationale for that. The other rationale for talking them up would to allow the justification for the build up of Western occupation forces in Afghanistan which may consequently be used in attacking Iran, and Pakistan without these countries taking the appropriate counter measures in preparation of such an eventuality (especially Pakistan), AND the general public in the USA, and UK asking what on earth their nations are doing fighting endless, narco-colonial wars which benefit nobody except the few organised criminals in their societies.

.

Riots with nasty, alien, disloyal Pakis at home fit into that overall psychological, emotive buildup and justification of this hidden criminal narrative. A faux dress rehersal for the coming wars abroad, endless wars; the unrestrained unaccountable criminals greed is never satisfied.

All very calculating, conveniently timely and criminal.

Once you grasp that the world does not always operate along the standards set by Pollyanna, then you can begin to get a better picture as to who are the true criminals in British and international society, and what motivates and who motivates actual state policy in such theaters such as Afghanistan, and how they add to their mass criminal deeds, in order to bolster earlier ones.

Article by former ambassador Craig Murray:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-469983/Britain-protecting-biggest-heroin-crop-time.html

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2001/2848dope_money.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5514

http://spoonfeedin.blogspot.com/2008/06/opium-financed-british-rule-in-india.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3294

The war is unpopular. Normal people are peace loving.................people thrive and naturally develop where there is peace, and society follows the rule of law. That is how civilization progresses. But for a few criminal elements the inverse of this is true......the rule of law should be ignored, there must be war to act as cover and distraction for their illegal operations; People must apprehend fear and cower under their designated security; people must fight 50 year wars for their country, "We fight the "bad" guys over there so that we don't have to fight them over here"........but wait some of the "bad guys" are already here, and so we fight them in our shores.........and presumably that is the underlying narrative of the recent riots, the "enemy within" must be fought by our brave lads.

Ordinary British people and some soldiers are already questioning the real validity of the war, especially in Afghanistan running for 8 years now, propping up a corrupt and ineffective narco-state. The brother of Hamid Karzai is one of the biggest drug lords of Afghanistan, and his running mate for President is another notorious criminal warlord who is into......you guessed drugs. So the unpopular war must be bolstered in its support...........It requires statements from the PM to fight the noble fight, and it also requires theater, crude theater ..........it requires more canon fodder of poor unquestioning white unemployed working class lads, with little or no education....to teach the "wog" what for..... correctly wound up, to join the ranks of the British army to fight for the Heroin business.

Can there be a more noble cause?

Open address to the brothers on the far right.

.
.
.
.


My Aryan brothers……as one Aryan brother….to ….well, fellow Aryan brothers, what you do brings disrespect to “our race”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Iranians

It is not considered a great achievement in “our culture” to attack the weak, down trodden bottom of the pile poor under class to prove our Aryan manhood, huddled pathetically together in their smelly filthy ghetto’s, subsisting on the fringes of society, in often Third World conditions, forever moaning and cringing, providing entertainment subjects for the Sun and Daily Mail.

Indeed my Aryan brothers I am not sure Aryan men are the most physically brave on this earth……often black men out of Africa seem to exhibit the greatest physical prowess, as in boxing, sports of various types, and according to the “Bell Curve” they have the biggest schnitzels…..........particularly the Dinka in Southern Sudan. Being “ard” and “up for it” does not make one a true Aryan.

Our forefathers in the CENTRAL ASIAN STEPPES, lit fires in the bitter chilled winter nights of our original ancestral lands where we evolved as a distinct race, sang songs of joy, recited poetry, drank wine and opiates….and danced around the fire……..they had beards, and long hair (like hippies….natural protection against the bitter cold weather)They were spiritual, shamanistic, at one with mother earth…constantly traveling, living off the land, which they never claimed was theirs to own.

What you do and how you project yourself goes against the code of the true “Aryan brotherhood.” Shaven heads, beer with racist hateful songs, insecure and angry, in male bonded groups on Saturday nights…..this pseudo-gay behavior that has very little to do with Aryan culture, my dear brothers.

Now let us proceed and address the more substantive issues.

What are the real issues that vexes Perfidious Albion, that shining lone beacon of light unto the world?

1. We must question the official narrative from the mass media that Britain is in dire straits…..often juxtaposed with stark images of the immigrants to get the British tea pot boiling. I remember the news in the 1970’s and the 1980’s…..lines of Aryan brothers unemployed, sad, dejected collecting their social security, and then the pictures of a wog merrily working away at his job. Oh the imagery! One always thought journos were enlightened types from happy balanced middle class backgrounds, with a strong social conscience and sense of communal responsibility—–what a load of bollocks! With the exception of a few, many are racist, cunning racist, educated racists, devious racists, dangerous racists, Goebbels racists,Melanie Philips racist………working in the sensitive mass medium. Often with agenda’s, inviting the most obvious caricature types from the immigrant community…................the ones which look dangerous, menacing, teenage sexually deprived angst ridden, and not clearly happy in Britain.

In America they have a label for these types, “Presstitutes” which means that they serve as organs of the government, collecting and memorizing state “talking points” dished out to them during lobbying sessions…….what % of the journos work for MI-5; who knows?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

But the true Aryan brothers must not believe everything they see and read in the British press, which dish out “one good hate a day”…or the enormously stogy British TV, again with agenda’s……not good agenda’s.

Britain is a paradise, a rich paradise, and to appreciate the country one must leave it and see the rest of the world. Then one can get a better perspective. Then we can see from afar how lucky the British people really are.

In India if one visits the police station to report a crime, they arrest you, and your relatives must come and pay a bribe to release you. In India 850 million live on 25 pence a day; In India 850 million live on just one meal a day, consisting of rice and nothing else……..In Pakistan a jail bird is the President of the country…..In Russia the police are known as “Wolves”……in South Africa.........in Columbia……in Haiti…in DRC.........in Somalia....in Iraq........Britain is a paradise compared to the rest of the world, and do not let the devious agenda filled journos tell you other wise.

Is it so bad to put things in relative terms, and for once not take things so literally, my dear brothers to the far right?

Now the 2nd substantive issue my brothers:

2. The current economic crisis in the UK is the result of the greed of the bankers in "The City" in London. They were greedy, and they speculated on bad financial schemes and some more....and in the end it all went pear shaped for them....and the country,.... translated into loss of jobs and a slowdown of the economy.........the ghetto wogs have very little to do with that, very little. A lot of them don't even operate in the official economy, but subsist in the margins.

And so of course since the bankers own Britain they must be rescued, by the British government, using the taxpayers money; your money, the wog money, and everybody else who does an honest days work .....money...they feel they have an entitlement, and since the government is beholden to them, the government will rescue them at the expense of the rest of the country.

The recent circus of the brothers in Brum provides a very USEFUL DISTRACTION for the foibles and follies of the bankers.........indeed the brothers in Brum are dumb fodder tools of MI-5, which in turn is a tool of...."The City" and London. To honestly fight the noble fight for ones beliefs is one thing, but to be manipulated by rich fat bankers for your entertainment and distraction value is quite another.

The 3rd Substantive issue:

Many British troops have died in Iraq and Afghanistan, and many many more come home physically and psychologically damaged, as a result of their experiences. They become social security basket cases, or simply social outcasts living with homeless people, forgotten by everybody, including the state......and the state is happy to forget them.

Israel has historical linkages with Iraq going back many years, perhaps 3,000 years. Ancient Assyrians invaded Israel, defeated them and took them as slaves to ancient Iraq. They were eventually freed, and able to return to Israel when Cyrus the Great invaded the area and liberated them circa 538 BC. But psychologically Israelis, a race which looks as much back back into history as much as they look forward have a "thing" about Iraq, which you my true Aryan brothers will never be able to comprehend unless you are one of them, living in Israel.

Then there is the issue of Saddam's Iraq, which the Israelis attacked in 1981 against their nuclear installation; the horrifying fact that Saddam had gassed his own people at Halabja in 1988.........and his other military programs....the supergun program.....his missile programs........his chemical/biological programs.....his nuclear program........and a standing military of 1.1 million men in peacetime (1990) 25% of GDP on defense, 6,000 tanks, 4,000 artillery, 600 jet fighters..................made the Israelis very nervous about Saddam, and they angled to get America, and the UK into war against that country via the stooge of Kuwait.

Saddam was never quite sure who his father was, and he was raised by one of his uncles, and a Kuwaiti minister well acquainted with these facts and prodding from the correct sources raised the issue of his illegitimacy in undiplomatic ways guaranteed to arouse his ire, during key negotiations between Iraq and Kuwait. The negotiations between Kuwait and Iraq in 1990 were about canceling Iraq's debts; Saudi had canceled ALL Iraq's debts, but the Kuwaitis insisted that Iraq repay all the money with interest that they had given Iraq during the Iran/Iraq war......the Iraqi position was that Iraq had fought a pan-Arab war against the Persian hoards, and that if the mullah's of Iran had won then many of the Sunni Gulf monarchies would have been swept away.

Additionally there were disputes about the correct boundary between Iraq and Kuwait...........the boundary between Iraq and Kuwait has changed a thousand times......Kuwait is an artificial creation of the British as a petrol station for the British navy......disputes about the correct boundary of the two countries came and went, blowing hot and cold depending on the political climate in Iraq..........The political climate in Iraq by 1990 was hot; they had fought an 8 year war against Iran; allegations the Kuwaitis were extracting secretly crude oil from Iraqi territory near the Kuwait/Iraq border........with undiplomatic behavior from Kuwaiti ministers added to the negative situation between the two countries. Finally in a meeting with the American Ambassador to Iraq, Ms Gillespie, Saddam received confirmation, unofficially that America would not intervene in any quarrels between Iraq and Kuwait...............and then he invaded Kuwait.......and into a trap.

Saddam is not a nice chap, but you need to understand the issue and where British interests lie's in relation to that theater. Saddam's military was smashed in the 1991 1st Gulf war, with 30% of his forces remaining. Between 1991--2003, Iraq was under stringent sanctions, and as a result of this sanction about 1 million Iraqis perished for lack of food and medicine, mainly children.

But Israel which played a critical role behind the scenes in the 1st Gulf war wanted full scale occupation of the country. In addition within that overall context Likud ideologist of the Far Israeli Right penned a document for the then PM Benjamin Netanyahu, called "A Clean Break" (1996)....which advocated using American military might to aggressively expand the interests of Israel around the hinterland of Israel........against Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, perhaps Egypt and Iran later. This document then was repackaged four years later under a new title, "The Project for an New American century" (2000)......which like the policy document four years earlier also called for an aggressive military policy, but this time packaged as Pax Americana policy................penned/signed by the same people who wrote the "Clean Break" document....with the additional names of a few Israeli Firsters from the USA so as not to make it too obvious. These signatories to the PNAC document then joined the Bush administration, as key advisers in the Pentagon and Dick Chenney's office.......9/11 took place organized by the Israelis and Dick Cheney........and the rest as they say is history.

The Invasion of Iraq by America in 2003 was always Israel's goal........going on for years. Saddam posed no threat to the UK, or USA or Israel.......Saddam by 2003 was a spent force seeking Asylum in the UAE, with guarantees..................But Israel wanted its pound of flesh, and so the invasion.

The invasion of Iraq brought NO benefits for Britain except for the privilege of looking like Bush's poodle and stooge, no mean feat.......................there are no political benefits for Britain in Iraq, and there are no economic benefits for Britain in Iraq, as most of the contracts go to American companies. Normally when Britain commits to war the reasons for war are spelled out openly and honestly by the PM in public addresses and in Parliament............this is a tradition.....war for Britain is a solemn, sober and serious occasion................Britain has been in many wars for the last 1000 years..........But this government lied, and manipulated facts and other such devious things to get Britain into this war......WHY?

Most British people are not happy that Britain is fighting in Iraq, and of course naturally a lot of the immigrants are not happy about Britain killing poor people in Third World countries, a lot of whom look like them in some respects....this is only natural.....the real issue is not where their sympathy lies.............expressed overtly or covertly, what they feel or say does not matter; they weren't brought into Britain so as to get their opinion on sensitive state issues; they have little or no organised political power; Its a diversion.......the real issue which you should be concerned about and therefore asking is why Britain fighting wars for other countries.......namely Israel. To be sure Lord Levi as Middle East adviser might be biased given his background, or Sir David Manningham........but at the end of the day there must surely be a greater number of people who see the folly of such situation

With Afghanistan it is about Heroin....................see the above blog about you again.

Now the 4th substantive issue my dear Aryan brothers:

My Aryan brothers let me address the vexed issue of aliens in our midst.

Britain is NOT a multi-cultural society, though there is a pretense and official narrative that it is. The aliens and non-European population constitute about 6-7% of the population, huddled together in the inner city areas of the big cities which inadvertently gives the impression that they are “every where” when the majority commute in from the lush green white suburbs. In addition in especially the summer, many wogs migrate from their hot countries to the moderate climes of our shores for R&R which falsely amplifies this incorrect impression, particularly in London. By 2036, when the British population reaches about 68 million depending on a number of intervening variables, the aliens population will still be at most 8-9% of the population huddled together in their stinking inner city masses.

Or to put it in another way Britain by 2050 will still be an over whelming white and Christian country/society. The powers that be who run Britain will not allow it to become a true multi-racial society. If the powers that be have let in a certain % of small insignificant non-white aliens into British society it is usually for certain good reasons, that you or I are not privy to. It most certainly is not the case that these aliens have outwitted the state of the art British police state and slipped in through the Channel Tunnel, or rowed through the North Sea quietly into the British shores undetected…………..The British elite have decided to let them in from the 1950’s through a variety of policies, and if you genuinely apprehend fear from their very modest presence in our shores then you must correctly and properly address your concerns to the RELEVANT authorities and elite groups in UK society…..the Rothschild and Bankers of “The City” who run the UK.

That is the proper manly Aryan thing to do.

Indeed my dear Aryan brothers, targeting these wogs publicly is of little use accept perhaps in satisfying possible pseudo-gay urges which exist under the cover of projecting aggressive working class male “angst” and “power”in an S & M way….”you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you ,you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you ,you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you ,you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you ,you hit me I hit you, you hit me I hit you ” ……..”all right sunshine, was that good for you?”.

…………..then there are deep dangerous consequences of agitating against wogs where they apprehend fear and stay home, which I must bring to your attention my dear brethren. In detailed research it has been proven that when people apprehend fear…..they go on extensive bonking sessions…..bonking, bonking and more bonking. In relation to Israel when they impose curfews in the Gaza concentration camp and West bank concentration camp the Palestinian wogs go on extensive bonking sessions, and bonking and bonking, and more bonking….as a result these “insects” start breeding like rabbits, such that the Palestinians will out number the Israeli population in the future…….with the Israeli middle class skilled force looking to migrate to the EU or California. In India they are trying to address the problem of over population (soon to have the largest population in the world) ……by providing free television and electrification of all villages, so that the Indian villagers don’t go on extensive bonking sessions, going to bed early, after 6/7 where the natural light fades.

You my Aryan brother were most probably not good students at school, but most likely posed as the clown of the class, teasing the teachers, acting all smart, with few qualifications or skills to show for, and any redeeming worth which might make you employable and viable. What is your own true worth to society beyond drinking beer, and picking fights with rival gangs and drawing on social security? What have you done to deserve special entitlements within the British state?…….but you say to me you are British, white, and born in the country and that is enough.

But in the true sense the immigrant does not infringe on your turf, or take your social security, or your special council house….as invariably he tends to live in the worst houses, which you would never consider living in. He works in restaurants between 5pm—4am in the morning; works in hospitals for 12/14 hours sweeping and cleaning; works on the buses and trains which are jobs you would never apply for; works in food processing factories for little or no pay…….and so forth which you would never dream of doing, or is simply self employed in HIS restaurant or shop working 7 days a week and 15/16 hours a day…..which again you would never consider doing….in short the immigrant rarely takes “your” job and prospective income.

No self respecting true Aryan brother would be seen doing these types of coolie occupations. The coolie/wog fills a certain demand in the market, that is all …demand and supply.

You might opportunistically say you would do these types of job, but I really wonder whether you really would/physically could. The great boon about the immigrant is that he works harder than you for less pay, and in the cold logic of capitalism the immigrant is a boon/asset for a variety of reasons for British society, specifically in certain sectors.

As to integration, whats the hurry……………it will take a while. The Jews took hundreds of years when Oliver Cromwell unofficially let them into Britain again after the English Civil war. The Jews based in Holland had funded his war machine and the round heads (skin heads) against the cavaliers, after being expelled 350 years earlier around circa 1300. And they still live in their ghetto’s Golda’s Green, and still in many respects do not feel British…………powerful Jews in the state structure Lord Levi, Sir David Manningham et al are not partial to following policies which ultimately favor Israel’s interests over that of the true interests of the UK (Iraq/Afghanistan).

We must temper our expectations as to what extent, and degree the wog can truly integrate into British society after they migrate from their Third World villages straight into the sophisticated atmosphere of a modern First World city life.........how quickly the process of integration takes place must be realistic......the process will take generations.

In relative terms and in the true sense, Britain is not a multi-cultural society though it is certainly fashionable to talk up the area for a variety of reasons. In Germany, by contrast, the Auslander population is 17% and by 2036, the ethnic German population will come down to 56 million from 71 million, whilst the Auslander population will be 30 million, approaching 40%…….and there after if the trend continues into 2060, Germans will become minorities in their own countries; I haven’t heard of ethnic based mass riots in Germany yet against Auslanders very recently. The Bundestaat Polzei handle the area quite firmly.

France’s ethnic population is around 14% I believe depending on whose statistics you take. The French are known for their revolting behavior and tendencies….French farmers, students from 1968, left wing groups and so forth; don’t require a lot of provocation………then it is only natural for Francophone immigrants to ape this national characteristic, which they did in 2005. But alternative research would suggest that that sad episode was more the handiwork of the ambitious interior minister under Chirac, Nicolas Sarkozy, who subsequently went on to become President on a right wing immigrant backlash ticket which he had carefully crafted………..powerful water hoses targeted on the immigrant ghettos in Paris alongside provocative police action, as in clearly provocative police action designed to exact vengeful woggish responses. The water hoses are crude metaphor meaning, he will as President cleanse the estates of the immigrant filth…which he never did. Since then allegations he is a MOSSAD agent, by Le Figaro and under police investigations. He has also introduced Holocaust studies into the French curricula.

Is someone trying to crudely do David Cameron's party a favor in the UK 18 points ahead already, and does he welcome such assistance?

In the USA the non-European element of the population is approaching 34%…..the USA is a true multi-ethnic nation. It has a black president, attorney general, a former head of the armed forces who was black, a former black foreign secretary………and so forth…….supreme court judge in addition…………media presence, Bill Cosby,………….and so forth in the INNER SANCTUMS of the state……………which is unimaginable in the UK, and will not happen, now or in the foreseeable future in “multiracial Britain” with its 6-7% non-white ethnic population.

The little shits in Al-magerine and Headbuttterriers, are like YOU “controlled opposition” providing PUNCH and Judy theater to titillate the audience controlled and propagated by………………….the security services; Larger than life, OTT characters designed to apprehend revulsion from any decent human being….captain hook hands, one eye, contorted abnormal angry faces……………….. Omer Shaikh, and the 7/7 members all worked for them……………….once in a while in this PUNCH and Judy theater they are “brought out” to entertain, in highly provocative manner, and then it is your turn, and then them, then you, highlighted in unhelpful ways by the state media circus…….the pattern is clear, for those of us who wish to focus on the area. Funny enough my Aryan brothers, whilst many of us languish in unemployment or subsist on the margins of society, angry and fretful, a lot of these fundie shits have great jobs in high street firms and other such respectable establishments, openly feted by the media as standard bearer norms and leaders of the ethnic community……….where as within the 2 million Muslim community there are great seas of secular articulate individuals, fully integrated in British society, who aren’t caricatures of the shitty embarrassing above.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fakealqaeda.html

so my Aryan brothers we must NOT become “useful idiots” of the Bankers and their agenda’s of baiting & diversion…..the immigrants are the least of Britain’s true overall problems…you do a disservice to the dignity of the "Aryan nation" and to what are the true issues which require serious addressing, by you, me and the rest of British society.

http://mostaqueali.blogspot.com/2008/04/more-crypto-jews-in-america.html

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=121

http://judicial-inc.biz/Wolfgang_Hawke_neo_nazi.htm

http://judicial-inc.biz/8.1,another_kosher_nazi.htm

http://judicial-inc.biz/Bill_White.htm