The British Plan To Recolonize
The Subcontinent Is Gaining Ground
by Ramtanu Maitra Executive Intelligence Review
The massive suicide bomb attack on July 7, which killed 41 people at the Indian Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, including the Indian military attaché and counsellor, indicates the ruthlessness of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)-British MI6-aided Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), or Pakistani Taliban, to break up Pakistan, and create a new, and unstable, nation bordering the resource-rich Central Asia and Iran. Although the Western media is keen to blame the "Taliban," it is clear that the Afghan Taliban was not involved, and that it was the handiwork of the TTP.
( I certainly think the date is significant 7/7, as in the London 7/7 in 2005, these criminals like such cryptic dates, and looks like the British did it, with the help of the ISI maybe, and local contacts such as the TTP? But isn't the ISI's hands full now in FATA, and The NWFP, Baluchistan....etc.....would it make sense for them to try to meddle against India at such a juncture.....I have previously argued that it wasn't the ISI couple of posts back...Titled "Cui Bono", but having said that, I don't have full knowledge of these criminals in the ISI and what is their true mentality......such things may look threatening to Pakistan's security wise.........hostile forces edging to invade Pakistan from the West (USA/NATO)........and you don't want hostile forces in the East edging to invade Pakistan(INDIA)......But having said this, such an assumption assumes that the ISI operates in Pakistan's best interests..........and it would seem in reality the ISI is in fact an appendage to British geo-strategy........Kiyani was head of the ISI wasn't he?)
A day earlier, on the first anniversary of the Pakistani Army's raid of Lal Masjid at the heart of Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, a suicide bomber blew himself up, killing at least 19 people, mostly police officers. (ISI operation) On the same day the Indian Embassy was attacked, terror struck Pakistan's largest city, Karachi, six times within an hour, as unknown terrorists triggered a series of blasts that wounded over 50 people, including children and policemen. Karachi, the largest Pakistani port, is the main disembarkation station of nearly 70% of the supplies that go to Afghanistan by road to the battling U.S./NATO troops. The supplies pass through the famed Khyber Pass—a 30-mile stretch between the Khyber Hills. At the time of this writing, the Khyber Pass, and a part of Peshawar city, 22 miles east of the Pass, remain infested with militant local tribes working hand-in-glove with the TTP.
(Whilst some operations are ISI, I cannot believe all the operations against Pakistan, inside Pakistan are being carried out by the ISI....what is clear is that a policy of destabilization exists, of which the ISI seems sadly to be an integral part......the explosions against Benazir, and her assassination for example looks like ISI activity.......whilst the rest more probably is Western and Indian intelligence operations)
The only way to comprehend what is happening is to first step back, and look at the key geostrategic puppet-master in the region: the British Empire.
British Geostrategy for the Subcontinent
The British policy toward South Asia, and the Middle East as well, is uniformly colonial, and vastly different from that of the United States. Even today, when Washington is powered by people with tunnel vision, at best, the U.S. policy is not to break up nations, but to control the regime, or, as has become more prevalent in recent years, under the influence of the arrogant neocons, to force regime change. While this often creates a messy situation—for example, in Iraq—the U.S. would prefer to avoid such outcomes.
( I don't know, I would disagree with this analysis, hasn't Iraq basically broken up into three pieces under American auspices, and the 'Salvador option ops' by both the Americans and British? Didn't the Americans cooperate with the British in toppling the Shah in 1979? Didn't the British and Americans jointly install Colonel Qaddafi into power in 1969? Hasn't American intelligence since the 1950's in places such as Iran, Egypt and other places, shown the same willingness to work with extreme Islamic fundamentalists groups to destabilize and co opt Muslim movements as the British have been doing from much earlier?----where is the difference?)
Britain, on the other hand, built its geostrategic vision in the post-colonial days through the creation of a mess, and furthering the mess, to break up a country. This policy results in a long-drawn process of violent disintegration. That is the process now in display in Pakistan, as well as in many other nations, including Zimbabwe and Kenya—where the British colonial forces had hunted before, and still pull significant strings.
( Thank you for comparing Pakistan with African countries! Yes the British are still very much interested in South Asia........in case you have not noticed in India your PM is Oxbridge, and a good deal of your elite is Anglophile, and the key institutions of the state, the armed forces have a distinctly Raj flavor.................and India is still part of the commonwealth, looking forward to holding the Commonwealth games in 2010; the British Raj that Killed 30 million Indians (Gideon Polya, "Not quite Jane Austen"), stole $1 trillion worth of Indian assets, and basically taught ALL Indians that everything they stood for was inferior to their culture.)
When the British left the Indian subcontinent in 1947, it was divided into India and Pakistan. The British colonial geostrategists, coming out of World War II, realized the importance of controlling the oil and gas fields. If possession could not be maintained, the strategists argued, Britain and its allies must remain at a striking distance, to ensure their control of these raw material reserves, and deny them to others.
(It does not follow in your argument that the Partition of the Subcontinent was linked to oil...........there is no clear linkage between oil/gas, and the need to partition South Asia. I'll offer a more simple possibly obvious answer....a united India would have been more powerful and prosperous, and thus more difficult to influence than a divided India as it is now.........where presumably the British, Israelis and others shuttle between the ISI, and RAW, with all the other security wonks and whisper to them how really bad the other side are...........And the Pakistanis and to a lesser degree the Indians buy and buy this false propaganda, (with the help of terrorist incidents in both countries by the ISI, RAW, Israelis, UK and USA) and purchase security systems from the UK, Israel and the USA to fight each other with.)
At the end of British rule, Pakistan consisted of East Pakistan (which since has been liberated to form Bangladesh) and West Pakistan. West Pakistan's western wing (west of River Indus) bordering Afghanistan and Iran, consisted of Baluchistan, the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Tribal areas. North of all these, was the state of Jammu and Kashmir, which was a princely state under the Maharaja of Kashmir. Of the three areas, Baluchistan and the Tribal areas had not been brought under the British occupation and were kept instead as British protectorates. This was because the Tribals were ferocious, and made it clear they would not accept British troops within their territories. Moreover, the British crown figured that these areas would act as a buffer with Afghanistan, where the British were worried the Russians would show up.
(The British told Nehru and Gandhi that Pakistan wouldn't survive for long and would crawl back to India soon.......another Raj lie that the Congress naively accepted with good faith...............when the realization came that this would not happen, I think some contingency plans were made to take back India's 'losts parts' by Nehru, and in 1951, the Pakistanis started shouting and screaming in the UN about Indian attacks, then the Pak PM is killed in 1951 by the British?, and a long process of destabilization tales place until the military come into power in 1958. The British nudge the Pakistanis into America's arms from the early 1950's, and in 1954 you have a agreement between Pakistan and the USA, with America giving Pakistan an aid package of $1 billion ($700 million military aid, and $300 economic) All the American military hardware would eventually be used against India in 1965. One should of course add, what ever Indian unofficial policy exists towards Pakistan, it has always been Pakistan which has initiated wars against India and not the other way round)
Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP), however, is a different story. The NWFP, inhabited by Pushtun Muslims, was under the Indian National Congress, and led by Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, a close associate of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Ghaffar Khan had no intention of joining Pakistan, but when the British called for a referendum to decide which way the NWFP would go, Ghaffar Khan decided not to let his party participate, ostensibly because he feared violence. Because of this, the referendum won by only 50.49% in favor of joining with Pakistan.
( Gaffar Khan was a truly great man from South Asia..........mistreated by the Pakistan government, worse treatment than what he experienced under British rule....buried in Jalalabad Afghanistan, and not in his native NWFP)
It is evident that Britain did not want India to have any direct land link either to Afghanistan, or Russia, or Iran. In the North, when the dispute over the status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) arose, India's access to the North was blocked as well.
( India's land linkage with Russia would be handy wouldn't it? Well you have an air force base in Tajikistan)
The Kashmir dispute, the handiwork of London, showed what the British were looking for. Using a large number of Mirpuris (Mirpur is a part of J&K) who had migrated to Britain soon after the partition of the subcontinent, the MI6 built up a very strong anti-India lobby in J&K and encouraged the demand for an independent Kashmir. At the same time, MI6 lent a hand to the Pakistani ISI, to implement terrorist acts within the India-held part of J&K which would undermine India's efforts to stabilize the area. The policy has not worked so far, but a royal mess has been made, thanks partly to India's misguided, and often ruthless, policies.
( Yes the partition of India and of Kashmir is classic divide and rule by the evil British empire. I wrote a short piece about this four years ago titled; "Geographical teases" ........Israel's borders....guaranteed to invite more wars........Shat al Arab---Iran/Iraq...........Bangladesh and Assam also with Kashmir. Teasing is a major part of British psychologically and the hapless efforts of victim states to 'rectify the geographical teases' with the British colonial cartographers laughing at the sidelines. This applies to a lessor degree with Cyprus and Ulster.
There are 700,000----800,000 Pakistanis in Britain...........Until the advent of East Europeans the Pakistanis were the most hated ethnic group in the UK, and perhaps still are now. They live in ghetto's in the big cities, under heavy Orwellian surveillance. They are at the bottom of society, below that of the Africans even......thanks to the JEW owned UK media and Jewess such as Melanie Smith who are given free rein to spout any kind of bullshit that comes into her Jew mind in the British MSM, posing as an informed neutral expert (Goebbels in skirts would be a better description), and the Pakistani community has been baited by MI5 before elections, and OF COURSE used as cannon fodder for false flag ops by MI5 and their Israeli over lords.
The main characterization of the Pakistani community in the UK would be poverty, alienation and drugs.........they seem to be the main mules for drugs coming from Pakistan to the UK, and one also notes, even after 9/11, from Home Office statistics the high number of visa's that are given to non-resident Pakistanis coming to the UK, compared to say other Occidental and modern countries..............clearly there is a criminal nexus between the ISI, and British intelligence running this multi-billion $ show.
Unfortunately the relationship of the ISI with British intelligence it is not merely limited to importing drugs into Europe. There is also a terrorism nexus also involved. In the 100 or so universities in the UK all of which have a British intelligence presence, many Pakistanis are recruited into organizations such as Hizbutahirir and al-Majroun. They are then funneled into fundamentalists operations in the Balkans, Chechnya and of course Afghanistan/Pakistan and Kashmir, where they are further indoctrinated. As one who has attended universities in the UK, and wrote about British intelligence working outside of the law for his law dissertation paper ("The relationship between the State, Security Services and the Law")one can attest that these things do not happen without the knowledge and approval of British intelligence. One must add also with a certain amount of rueful reflection that a lot of the leaders of such organizations, with their beards and Islamic paraphernalia then go on to work in successful High Street jobs in major cities in the UK....they are then touted in both the UK Jew media and British society generally as standard bearers and epitome of British Muslim society, whereas nothing could be further from the truth. The agenda and image is fixed.
And so to Kashmir; Yes I happen to think what is happening now is the work of the ISI with British intelligence. So the Indian government has to be very careful and not be ham fisted.........clearly after 1989, with the withdrawal of the Soviets from Afghanistan, a lot the fundies were redirected by the ISI from there into Kashmir, and that they must have had the approval of their British intelligence overlords)
The MI6 mouthpiece, and a link to the British colonial establishment, was Eric Lubbock
Lord Avebury). He was the first British Member of Parliament to publicly support the Kashmiri secessionist movement, which he did in an address to a secessionist group, JKLF (Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front), at a conference in London, in 1991. There, he also announced his support for an armed struggle, according to The Dawn of Karachi. In a March 1995 issue of the JKLF's Kashmir Report, Lubbock condemned Indian policy in Kashmir as equivalent to what would have occurred if "Britain had been invaded in 1940," and suffered Nazi occupation. He demanded that Indian troops be withdrawn. "New Delhi fails to understand that if peaceful initiatives are thwarted, the inevitable result will be further violence," he threatened. Lubbock is still around pushing the colonial policies.
( What is British policy in Iraq, and Afghanistan; handing out flowers and well wishes to the locals?)
Who Are the Afghan Taliban?
For the uninitiated, it is important to realize that there exists a distinction between the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban. The Afghan Taliban, along with many other Afghans, are engaged in a war against the occupying U.S. and NATO troops, with the objective of driving them away so they can gain control of their land. In other words, these Afghans are ready to fight any foreign troops, be they are American, British, Canadian, or German. But they have no intention of doing harm to others who have not lent troops to the occupying forces. At the same time, the Afghan Taliban would accept help from anyone, including the Pakistani Taliban, or any jihadi group functioning along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, including the much-vaunted al-Qaeda. It must be noted that no Afghan Taliban has ever been spotted, either in Iraq, or Palestine, where the Western, or pro-Western troops are engaged in battling the local Islamic groups.
( Yes the last sentence is a good point about the Taliban being a local outfit rather a globalist one which are the ones run by Western intelligence, but I am not sure I would glorify them to that point. In essence we are talking about an extremely fundamentalists outfit, that has hosted foreign fundamentalists entities of all shades, against their better judgment in Afghanistan. We are talking about the Taliban which was founded by America through the ISI from 1994, once it became clear the old Mujaheddin could not secure Afghanistan for Pakistan....in that situation, with that background it seems more like a tool of Western geo-strategy for the region and not a true nationalist liberation force of Afghans for Afghans.)
On the other hand, while it is true that the Afghan Taliban have no love for the Indians, nonetheless they would not risk setting up a large operation of the kind that must have preceded the attack on the Indian Embassy. Moreover, the Afghan Taliban control large swathes of land in southern and eastern Afghanistan, but ground information suggests that they still are not in a position to carry out major attacks inside Kabul. Last April, an elaborate operation was put in place to assassinate Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul. Initially, the operation was attributed to the Afghan Taliban, but later the Afghan authorities charged that it was the Pakistani ISI behind the failed attempt.
( Yes a major attack of that sort against the Indian embassy with the 7/7 cryptic date was not the work of the Afghan Taliban.......it was an intelligence operation.......you say ISI; I don't know the accusation would seem to be too obvious, after all the other charges made by Kabul against lslamamabad, and the American desire to go into FATA.)
The Pakistani Taliban, however, are an altogether different kettle of fish, and are presently involved in breaking up Pakistan on behalf the geostrategic interests of the British colonials. This outfit, besides having a large number of tribes representing Pakistan's virtually ungoverned Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Northern Areas bordering Afghanistan and the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir, is guided by the Pakistani ISI and British MI6. The Pakistani tribal groups, who have never formally accepted Islamabad's authority, see, in the present situation, an opportunity to carve out a separate nation bordering Afghanistan in the West and River Indus in the East. This objective, however far-fetched it may have seemed just months ago, is now a distinct possibility, not only because the ISI and MI6 have chalked out a design for achieving it, but also because of Washington's reckless approach to taming the Taliban and al-Qaeda at any cost, including undermining of Pakistan's sovereignty.
( I would tend to disagree. I think the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban are all the same ...............they all have linkages to the ISI, at various levels, the UK, Americans and probably the Israelis....no there is no difference.......they are all "controlled opposition" to justify a Western presence in the region; provide token resistence to show that the West is engaged in a 'great struggle' against Islamic fanatics, and in the case of Pakistan to destabilize the country.
I really cannot accept that the WHOLE of the ISI is working to destroy Pakistan, and and not a bit of this fact has come out into Pakistan's inquisitive press.......what is more plausible is that certain elements of the ISI are working with foreign entities to destabilize Pakistan, and create the impression that FATA is not managable by Pakistan.)
The increasing disintegration of Pakistan's political establishment has added to the threat. The ISI has been deeply infiltrated by MI6, and the Pakistani Army does not have the will to engage in a bloody civil war to prevent yet another break-up, nor does Pakistan's weak political elite have a clue as to how to integrate the increasingly militant tribal areas with Pakistan.
( Rather a bleak assessment. The ISI IS the Pakistan army---where do you think its officers come from...from the civilian sector? The ISI and the Pakistan army are one and the same. Pakistan's political establishment was always weak, this is not new, and a problem not just restricted to Pakistan. I suppose when you have military men running your country for the better part of 35 years starting with General Iskander Mirza, then in the rest of the period it is perhaps not enough time to create credible strong civilian leadership.......because the military are always under mining them....and then you factor in the interventions of the British and USA, who have a vested interest in propping up weak corrupt politicians over strong nationalists ones.......Imran Khan....that fellow who headed Pakistan's Human Rights Commission...etc...there has got to be many credible civilian leaders inside Pakistan, BUT because of the interventions of the Pakistan military and the USA/UK...these people are not given a chance. Instead you have the likes of Shaukat Aziz, parachuted in from the the international banking sector with no clear linkages with the Pakistani people, or its politics (He has since disappeared out and away from Pakistan?), and now Mr. gangster supreme 10%.)
ISI-MI6 Link-Up
On the other hand, there exists a policy agreement between the ISI and MI6. Following the withdrawal of the defeated Soviet Army in 1989, the ISI moved in to arm and train the Taliban. The intelligence agency also brought in al-Qaeda, and was in the process of developing what is called "strategic depth," which, it argued, was necessary to protect the country from its "mortal enemy," India. The civilian governments in Islamabad, under the late Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, had little choice but to allow the Pakistani Army and the ISI to pursue this objective.
( The Taliban were created from 1994, not immediately after 1989 and the Soviet withdrawal, and as I understand it, the Taliban was an American idea, with Gulf funding, and ISI training and participation. As to al-Qaeda that is a total myth......just a bunch of Arabs doing bad videos and a lot of posing, and silly OTT interviews to set the scene and narrative for the Israeli false flag ops of the 1990's, and into this century. And the ISI helped the Israelis create this narrative........to be sure 12,000 mainly Arabs were trained by the ISI and Israelis in Pakistan, and later when the Soviets departed, actually training in Afghanistan. Some of these people even participated in the Bosnian war up to 7,000 of them.....But the vast majority of them went back to their own countries and continued to live normal lives, or participate in political struggles against their government, but not as al-Qaeda....al-Qaeda never existed......most of the spectacular ops in the USA, and in the Greater Middle East is Israeli)
After 9/11, the scene changed rapidly. The Bush Administration identified Afghanistan, which was under Taliban rule, as the staging ground of al-Qaeda, and invaded the country with the intent of eliminating both the Taliban and al-Qaeda, in one fell swoop. Neither the ISI, and by extension, a section of the Pakistani Army, nor the British colonial operatives, wanted these assets, set up over years with the intent of controlling Central Asia, and undermining Russia, China, and India, to be sacrificed. Pakistan's ungoverned FATA immediately became the shelter of many who were facing Washington's wrath. In December 2001, Asia Times reported that the former ISI chief and a close collaborator of the MI6, "Hamid Gul, nicknamed the 'Godfather of the Taliban,' is believed to be behind moves to help the Taliban establish a base in Pakistan's autonomous Pushtun tribal belt."
(It is amusing that a couple of Jewish mafia figures like Silverstein et al with Mossad, undermined a intricate two decade old, British, NWO, Rothschilds, Brzezinski plan to further surround Russia and then move on to China...........But the Americans did allow ( actually provide ?) planes and helicopters to ferry thousands of Taliban out of Kunduz to safety into Pakistan....in the order of 3,000, once they were surrounded by Northern Alliance forces in November 2001, and OBL was allowed to escape with his full escort from out of Tora Bora, in full view.........So the Rothschild/British plan was not totally crushed........AND their primary representative in America, Brzezinski will be back soon, against Russia through Obama)
The added irony, is that Washington's foolhardy approach involves two of its "best allies"—Britain and Pakistan—who had built up these assets, and were keen to protect them from Washington's missiles and rockets. The outcome of Washington's policy is now plain for everyone to see: Having routed the Taliban, and driven them from power within weeks following the invasion, almost six and a half years later, Washington is now facing an enemy which is surely much stronger than it ever was before. The credit for this, of course, goes to the ISI and MI6. Both have now come to realize that not only can the assets be protected, they can be "officially" lodged in a country carved out of Pakistan.
( Who is a true friend , very hard to say. When a friend gives you so much trouble in the big bad world, are they really friends, or countries posing as friends. Many American commentators would argue that Britain was never a true friend, but a recent ally of convenience. ONLY after Widrow Wilson became President....and before that in view of their history, Americans tried to do everything opposite or differently to the British. The Bitter American Independence war; the war of 1812; The British covert help to the Confederate South during the Civil War; the financial infiltration through Rothschild agents..............JP Morgan etc,.....were fresh in the memory of nineteenth century Americans who had a healthy dislike and suspicion of Britain. Only after the WWI, did this attitude slowly change with the aid of the Jewish media.
As to Pakistan......a friend ? Think of it more as a master and servant relationship...and the Americans openly on several occasions treated their servant pretty badly..........Why do you think Ayub Khan wrote that auto biographical , 'Friends not masters"?
I am not sure the Taliban are any stronger now; about 8,000 strong whereas in 2001 they were 40,000, including thousands of foreign fighters, with ISI and Pakistani officers embedded in their ranks, and lots of Gulf funds pouring in....unlimited logistics from Pakistan....control of 90% of the country by 2001....BUT now not)
What Drives the ISI?
The question is, why would the Pakistani ISI want the separation? Putting aside the British control over the ISI for the moment, what must be recognized, is that the ISI was the brainchild of an Australian-born British intelligence officer, Maj. Gen. R. Cawthorn, Deputy Chief of Staff in the Pakistan Army in 1948, who later served in Australia as head of their Secret Intelligence Service. The ISI was structured to be manned by officers from the three main military services, and to specialize in the collection, analysis, and assessment of external intelligence, either military or non-military. At the time, as it exists even today, the ISI considered India its "mortal enemy," and the key to hurting India was to wrest control of the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir, where Muslims are in majority.
(The ISI is the 'mortal enemy" of Pakistan'......and lasting stability for South Asia.....it is a rogue criminal organization that owes its allegence to foreign anti-Pakistani entities)
There is yet another "meeting of minds" between MI6 and the ISI in recent days: their mutual hatred of Afghan President Karzai. The ISI rejected Karzai out of hand because the Afghan President is close to India, and even Russia—but cool toward Pakistan. So, the ISI feels it necessary to replace Karzai with someone who will be pro-Pakistan and anti-India.
Nor does MI6 like Karzai, and has joined with the ISI to remove him, because he is controlled from Washington, and has become openly anti-British: Last December, when Karzai learned that two British MI6 agents were working under cover of the United Nations and the European Union, and behind his back, to finance and negotiate with the Taliban, he expelled them from Afghanistan. One of them, a Briton, Michael Semple, was working as the acting head of the EU mission in Afghanistan, and is widely known as a close confidant of Britain's ambassador, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles. The second, an Irishman, Mervin Patterson, is the third-ranking UN official in Afghanistan.
These MI6 agents were entrusted by London with the task of using Britain's 7,700 troops in the opium-infested, Pushtun-dominated southern Afghanistan province of Helmand to train 2,000 Afghan militants, ostensibly to "infiltrate" the enemy and "seek intelligence" about the lethal arms of the real Taliban. Karzai rightly saw it as Britain's efforts to develop a lethal group within Afghanistan.
( So there we have TTP members going into Pakistan, and attacking Pakistan security posts)
In addition, around the same time, Karzai was under pressure from Britain, the U.S., and the UN, to appoint Lord Paddy Ashdown, a British Liberal Democrat, as the UN Special Envoy to Afghanistan. Ashdown had left his "viceregal" mark while serving as the High Representative of the United Nations for Bosnia a few years ago.
Anticipating that Ashdown, true to his reputation in the Balkans, would function like a colonial viceroy under orders from London, Karzai summarily called off the appointment. This decision raised quite a few hackles in London, and elsewhere.
( About the only good thing Karzai has done.......Afghanistan does not need Viceroys from Britain with the historical background of that country in this region, strutting about in Afghanistan, speaking meaningless blurry platitudes...............whilst Afghans really suffer. What Afghanistan needs is the whole coalition lot to go away immediately, and let the Afghans return to their Medieval ways, isolated, harming nobody.........now the next thing Karzai needs to do is create a timetable like Malaki for the foreign forces to leave Afghanistan)
MI6-ISI's Anti-Russia Ties
During the Cold War, the Pakistani ISI was not only training and infiltrating armed militants inside the India-held part of Jammu and Kashmir, but was utilized by the British to create security problems on Russia's southern flank. When the Soviets bumbled into Afghanistan with thousands of troops and tanks, ISI and MI6, along with the CIA, joined forces in the early 1980s to recruit mujahideen to fight the Red Army. MI6 turned over to the ISI some of their assests in the London-based organization known as al-Muhajiroun, or The Emigrants. This became the recruiting arm of al-Qaeda in London, and was used for terrorist work. The first groups were Pakistanis; they were followed by Somalis and Eritreans, among others. Al-Muhajiroun operated at the time under the armless Omar Bakri Muhammad, known as "Captain Hook," who was the Imam of Finsbury Mosque in London.
( Another fake Muslim leading gullible misguided youths from the UK........Though I suspect given his persona and image his main task would have been to grand stand, and amplify the "big bad Islam" image in Britain.....giving provacative speeches in Mosques and in the British media......probably on the payroll of MI5...........isn't his daughter a lap dancer?..........he's done a good job for MI5, because in Britain hatred, suspicion and loathing for Muslims is one of the highest in the Western World, including North America, survey from few years back......on a par with Denmark.)
Coincidentally, in 1983, the British-based World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), headed by Prince Philip, which often provides the staging grounds for operations of MI6 and other British intelligence outfits, suggested that two national parks be created in Pakistan's Northwest, and although rather thin in natural wildlife, the preserves have proved to be excellent for growing poppy, and for training and staging mujahideen incursions into Afghanistan.
( Prince Philip..........ha ha he he !!!!)
But, in the post-Cold War days, and particularly after 9/11, Washington moved closer to India, which went from being a "Soviet puppet," as it was labeled by some American analysts, into becoming a U.S. ally. Following 9/11, Washington made it a point to seek India's help in fighting the war on terror. Although India never supplied Washington with troops, New Delhi strongly supported Washington's war on terror policy. At the same time, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf embraced this Washington-led policy, putting the ISI in limbo. With the anti-India angle suddenly removed, the ISI became vulnerable to the British plan to create a separate Islamic state, carved out of Pakistan, located on the threshold of Central Asia. MI6 succeeded in reigniting the the ISI's aspiration to liberate the state of Jammu and Kashmir as its prime mission. The attack on the Indian Embassy on July 7 was a statement of that objective.
( This 'paragraph' has interesting suppositions though not immediately related........yes India is much closer to America now with some agreements since 2005, and I think India provided logistical help in the 1991 and 2003 Gulf wars against Iraq. Lets also not leave out the closer relationship of Israel with India, which is not insignificant............as to the ISI being in limbo..........thats a bit of a stretch....its more active than ever before.....though probably a little bit more 'busy' inside Pakistan...........ISI Kashmir problems yes, with British encouragement yes)
Musharraf on the MI6 Role
The interweaving of British MI6 and the Pakistani ISI is too elaborate to fully describe here. (Peter Godgames book, "The Globalists and the Islamist" covers the real relationship between the two quite well, and I suspect there has good to be some good books inside Pakistan covering this area) But, to get an idea of it, consider this example: Pakistani President Musharraf, in his book, In the Line of Fire, stated that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, a Britain-born Pakistani who has been accused of kidnapping and killing Wall Street Journal correspondent Daniel Pearl, in Karachi, in 2002, was originally recruited by MI6, while studying at the London School of Economics. He alleged that Omar Sheikh was sent to the Balkans by MI6 to engage in jihadi operations. Musharraf added that, "at some point, he [Omar Sheikh] probably became a rogue or double agent."
( I imagine there are many 'Omar Sheikhs' operating out of Britain from the UK for British intelligence in the various political organisations of Pakistan)
On Oct. 6, 2001, a senior U.S. government official told CNN that U.S. investigators had discovered that Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, using the alias "Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad," had sent about $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers. "Investigators said Atta then distributed the funds to conspirators in Florida in the weeks before the deadliest acts of terrorism on U.S. soil that destroyed the World Trade Center, heavily damaged the Pentagon and left thousands dead."
(The 19 Hijackers involvment in 9/11 was an elaborate smoke screen distraction to create an alternative false narrative and false trail of what was essentially an Israeli intelligence ops carried out with the help of their agents in America using remote controlled flying vehicles. The list of the 19 were provided by RAW to the FBI cobbled together IMMEDIATELY after 9/11............WHY/HOW would the FBI and RAW(buddy of MOSSAD) know the names of the perpetrators so quickly after the event without the benefit of other clear evidence in America.......thus the accusations about Pakistani involvment in 9/11, with the coincidental visit of General Mahumud Ahmed to meet with key American officials in Washington, look like an elaborate setup, which ultimately leads to an attack against Pakistan jointly by the USA/Israel/India....to secure the Pak nukes......didn't happen....as Musharaf on pain of being bombed back to the stone age........decided to side with America in October 2001, after much thought. The false flag ops against the Indian parliament in a few months later by MOSSAD/RAW? was to reignite the anti-Pakistani drive.....attack and invasion, if not by America then by India alone.........came close to war)
Beyond that, the Saeed Sheikh affair shines a bright light on the MI6-ISI links. More than a month after the money transfer was discovered, the head of the ISI, Gen. Mahmud Ahmed, resigned from his position. It was reported that the FBI was investigating the possibility that it had been General Ahmed who ordered Saeed Sheikh to send the $100,000 to Atta. There were reports that Indian intelligence had already produced proof for the Pakistani administration that this was so.
(Suprise, suprise)
Even more important are the joint operations between the MI6 and the ISI. The export of jihad to the Central Asian republics to pressure the countries of the former U.S.S.R. was a joint venture of the ISI, Pakistan's Jamaati Islam (JI), and Hezbe Islami Afghanistan. It is also documented that the MI6 directly deposited money into an account in the name of Amir Qazi Hussain Ahmed of Pakistan's JI, name, which Qazi used to pump Islamic literature and money into the Central Asian republics to incite the local Naqshbandi circles (a Sufi group) to rebel against the governments.
Khalistan and the Assassination of Indira Gandhi
Britain's other gross interference to undermine Indian sovereignty with the help of the ISI became evident during the Khalistani movement in India's Punjab in the 1980s. A number of militant Sikh-led organizations, such as the Dal Khalsa, Babbar Khalsa, Council of Khalistan, the Khalistan Government-in-Exile, and the Sikh Federation were headquartered in Britain. The Sikh Federation was formed after the 2001 proscription by the British government of the International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF), while the Babbar Khalsa cadres started working under the aegis of the Akhand Kirtani Jatha (AKJ), another militant group, after the ban imposed by the British government. Moreover, the top leaders of the Khalistani movement, Jagjit Singh Chauhan and Gurmej Singh of the Khalistan Government-in-Exile, used Britain to call for an independent Punjab (Khalistan), yanked out of India.
Although the Khalistani movement, which helped in fomenting the plots to assassinate two Indian prime ministers—Indira Gandhi and her son, Rajiv Gandhi—in addition to the deaths of scores of innocent Indians, is no longer visible, London still carries the Khalistani flag. In a highly significant development for the internationalization of the Sikh freedom struggle, representatives from a range of leading Sikh organizations met with high-ranking officials of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) on Aug. 15, 2007, in London, in order to seek British support for the Sikh nation's right to self-determination.
( I thought the Rajiv Gandhi assasination was the work of the LTTE/MOSSAD.........beause he wanted to cut the foreign arms supply to the region, especially Israeli arms sales)
Goaded and helped by MI6 and Britain's colonial geostrategists, the ISI did its best to create chaos within Punjab during that period. At the time that the Khalistani movement had grown dangerous following the Indian Army's raid of the Golden Temple, the holiest of holy Sikh shrine in Amritsar, and of the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Pakistani ISI chief was Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul, who is now leading the charge on behalf of the Pakistani Taliban to undermine Pakistan's sovereignty.
According to an Indian intelligence analyst, in 1988, when Benazir Bhutto became prime minister, Gul justified backing the Khalistani terrorists as the only way to preempt a fresh Indian threat to Pakistan's territorial integrity. When Mrs. Bhutto asked Gul to stop playing that card, he reportedly told her: "Madam, keeping Punjab destabilized is equivalent to the Pakistan Army having an extra division at no cost to the taxpayers." Gul strongly advocated supporting indigenous Kashmiri groups, but was against infiltrating Pakistani and Afghan mercenaries into Jammu and Kashmir. He believed Pakistan would play into India's hands by doing so, the analyst pointed out.
The Kingpin
This brings us to the leading collaborator of the British MI6 within Pakistan, Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul. Driven by his anti-India zeal, and now, with an equally zealous Islamic fervor, Gul is perhaps the most dangerous individual in Pakistan today. As his support for the Pakistani Taliban is expected to unleash more violence in the coming days, Gul will become even more powerful.
( But he is no longer in power.........he left his position many years ago.........Many Pakistani generals display anti India zeal, not just Hamid Gul..........Musharaf was pretty anti India..........come to think of it I don't think there are any Pakistani generals with a modicum of toleration for India ......they are seething with jealousy at India's economic success, and the greater importance being given to India because of this growing economic and military strength........How do you translate the recent Kiyani visit to China? Anti Indian or an attempt to gage greater reliance on China at the expense of the USA 'ally' or both )
It is widely acknowledged, even by the CIA, that Gul played a key role in helping to train and arm the Afghan Taliban in the 1990s. He had extensive liaison with Osama bin Laden, now hated, but liked immensely earlier by the CIA-MI6-ISI trio, while that Yemeni-Saudi was in Afghanistan.
Since the Lal Masjid raid by the Pakistani Army at the behest of President Musharraf last July, to free the mosque of jihadis and Pakistani Taliban, Gul has become violently anti-Musharraf. The July 15, 2007 London Times reported comments by Gul following the Lal Masjid conflict: "The government is trying to hide the number of young girls killed. As the truth comes out that young girls were gassed and burnt, riddled with bullets and killed, it'll be bad for Musharraf."
BBC reported Gul's views on jihad, criticizing Musharraf for seeking to stop jihadists, and challenging: "Who is Pervez Musharraf to say we should stop Jihad, when the Koran says it and when the United Nations Charter backs it up? Musharraf says: 'Stop the jihad, do this, that and the other.' No, no, no. He cannot. There is a clear-cut Koranic injunction."
( In all armies there are nutjob generals......people who are a bit "out there" and not in the real world............you spend a lifetime on security, security, security...........and it is normal for the weaker men to seccumb to extremism, such as Hamid Gul...........Pakistan does not need Islam, Pakistan needs good clean efficient government..........More Islam of Hamid Gul's variety destabilises the country and helps revive the 2001 plan for a joint USA/India/Israeli/UK invasion of Pakistan...........moderation; legitimacy and good governance)
UPI and the Washington Times have quoted Gul's interview in Pakistan's Urdu newspaper Nawa-e-Waqt where he stated: "The leadership vacuum created by the sad demise of [Palestinian] President [Yasser] Arafat can only be filled by Osama bin Laden and [Taliban leader] Mullah [Mohammad] Omar, the real leaders that are the only dedicated individuals with the mass support of the Muslim world."
It is likely that Gul was directly involved in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Bhutto had contended that the rise of extremism in Pakistan could not have happened without support from government agencies, including the military and the powerful ISI. She added that, though Baitullah Mahsud, the frontman of the MI6 and the ISI in the TTP, had reportedly threatened to send suicide bombers against her if she returned to Pakistan, the real danger came from extremist elements within the government that were opposed to her return.
(Yes)
"I'm not worried about Mahsud, I'm worried about the threat within the government," she told the London Guardian. "People like Mahsud are just pawns. It is the forces behind them that have presided over the rise of extremism and militancy in my country."
(And so the hotel Marriot Bombing)
Despite his inciting speeches and his role on behalf of the terrorists masquerading as jihadis, Gul remains virtually untouchable. Following the imposition of a state of emergency by President Musharraf on Nov. 3, 2007, Gul had demonstrated against the Presidential order. He was arrested, but Musharraf had to release him within two weeks. It is evident that Hamid Gul has become too powerful and that he enjoys high-level protection. Cui bono?
