10.5.09

The Problem of Kashmir.

.
.
.
.



.
. . . An old article by Karan Thapar, about Kashmir and the problems within that state. Written by a good journalist who has come a long way since I first watched him on Sunday morning current affairs programs on Channel 4 in the mid-1980's.

Insurgency problems of center/regional relationships can be interpreted in two different ways within India. From the right, the problems are usually seen as security problems, which require a little bit more oomph within security, with a greater security presence, greater counter-insurgency operations, tougher international stance on security, and stricter regional and national anti-terrorist laws.


On the other side is the explanations and solutions offered by Karan Thapur which tries to look at the source of the problem, how it evolved, and how it can be solved through peaceful political means-------more sensitivity, understanding and love from the center.


As I understand it the security problems of Kashmir, the Punjab in the 1980's especially and Assam were the sole creations of the Central government in Delhi, and more specifically the Congress Party, AND more specifically related to the personality and governance style of Mrs Indira Gandhi. I am by no means endorsing it as a Congress created phenomenon of failure, the Congress Party after all has many good talented well intentioned people.


The problem begins with a lack of governance by the central government, with a strong perception by the dissenting locals that the central government does not care about the important concerns of the local masses, AND then on top of that a negative perception of actual and imagined interfere with local politics to the detriment and suppression of local interests, usually in a ham fisted rough shod way (East Pakistan/Bangladesh 1952----1971, being the classic example viz the Pakistan central government in Islamabad )


The Congress Party had more or less been in power for 40 uninterrupted years and it had become fat, lazy and corrupt by the end of that era (1947---1989). It lacked ideological conviction and zeal, and it sustained itself in power for the sake of power, and not governance. It was a quasi-dictatorship which manifested its true color in the Emergency of 1975--77.

The problem was compounded by the dynasty politics of the Congress Party where deference was given to candidates on the basis of family lineage rather then on true merit----an absurd situation in an aspiring secular modern country.
This system resulted in the coronation of Indira Gandhi as head of Congress over many better candidates, and with her coronation she brought in her conceptions of family entitlements, she was after all the daughter of Nehru no less, greater political and economic corruption, making her family billionaires covertly, and her peculiar brand of politics, as a women in a mans world where she had to constantly prove herself against the better record of her fore fathers.

And of course she had her personal traits of being a control freak, who trusted very few people. Some one who enjoyed hosting international conventions in India, millions of them which ultimately had very little relevance for India, except for the fact that such events allowed her to pose, make presentations with speech making, and the approval of the Western chattering classes.


It is the insecure, control freak nature in her character which resulted in the disasters, (for India) in Kashmir, Assam, Punjab and of course Sri Lanka.


And Karan this is the second part of the explanation why with the exception of the Punjab,............. insurgency still continues in those and other parts of India, which you missed out on. Her actions ill-conceived and insensitive allowed the predatory powers around India to recruit people into insurgency groups against India, and its interests. Pakistan in Kashmir, especially from 1990, as one clear example. The Assam insurgency, the Maoist insurgency, indeed all modern insurgencies (Mr. B. Raman) require the backing of state entities without which they cannot sustain themselves against a modern state, especially the size of India. But it is the misgovernance of the central government first and foremost, which allows outside predatory powers to take advantage of such situations in the second place.


So what are the solutions?
  • A mixture of love, sensitivity, respect and cutting of some slack from the center to those areas......saying "we trusts you"..."We have faith in you to govern yourself appropriately, and if you are not 100% perfect, its OK with us, your government won't be dismissed and central rule imposed.............we let the local people decide how effective you are in government, during state elections"
  • Greater central funds for the states. 50/50 share of the government budget between the Central and local State government.
  • Smaller states which are more realistically representative of local needs and more effectively governed. Why not 30-40 states eventually, within the overall Indian Union .
  • Get rid of arbitrary and ham fisted security laws which harm innocent people, and fill the ranks of the insurgency movements. There are some allegations that the Indian military have been infiltrated by the RSS. What cannot be disputed is that the Indian police is one of the worst performing in the world, and one does not think that the Indian paramilitary is that much different. As to RAW there are many colorful things one could say about that organization especially in relation to Sri Lanka and the LTTE. So lets avoid POTA, TADA or any draconian laws which "energize" right-wing fruit cakes within the ranks of Indian security with communal agenda's, who are as with most of South Asia essentially corrupt post-colonial security forces who through their illegal actions fill the ranks of the insurgency.
  • Lets reform the Indian security apparatus. Essentially it is a legacy of the British Raj, geared to fight for the British Raj...................the security institutions of India have quaint Anglofied names, which operate poorly compared to First World countries. Let us reform these organizations comprehensively, give them new uniforms, new equipment, better training, new Hindi names and better pay. The basic salary of a Indian police officer is 3,500 rupees? Obviously part-time crime must fulfill his basic needs.
  • Let us seal the borders of Assam/Myanmar.........Assam/China..........Nepal/China.........Bhutan/China.............Kashmir/Pakistan........and so forth, building better communications with these states in terms of road and rail.
Logically these states should want to be part of and close to India, as the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages of not being so. It is only through the sheer stupidity, corruption and incompetence of the central government in Delhi which then alienate nations and peoples who wish to live in harmony within the Indian superstate, and the many opportunities it can offer to them.






________________________________________________


Time to Say Sorry.
Karan Thapar in the Hindustan Times. 2008.


Are we responsible for the distrust, even the alienation, Kashmiris feel when they consider their 60-year association with India? Have we betrayed promises, mistreated our fellow citizens, trampled on their rights and brutally shattered their dreams? Did our behaviour make the insurgency ‘inevitable’?

It may seem odd to ask these questions when Srinagar is enjoying its best summer since 1989 but, I would argue, this is one reason why they need to be asked all the more forcefully. Just because the situation seems more normal doesn’t mean the underlying grievances have disappeared. And if we don’t look for honest answers we could slide back towards the precipice.

In a book called My Kashmir, recently published in America, Wajahat Habibullah suggests the answer is yes. And Wajahat should know. A Kashmir-cadre IAS officer, he served twice as Divisional Commissioner Kashmir. Since 1970, when he started his career as a Sub-divisional Magistrate in Sopore, he’s witnessed how Kashmiris were treated by both the state and central governments.

“The first in a series of blunders”, Wajahat writes, was the dismissal of Sheikh Abdullah’s government and his subsequent arrest in 1953. The Sheikh was not just a hero to his people, he was also the main force behind the accession. He symbolised Kashmiri hopes as well as the link with India. Even a half century later, long after the Sheikh’s days of glory, Wajahat says “Kashmiris look upon his arrest as the first of many betrayals”.

However, it’s the eyewitness evidence that Wajahat presents that is the truly compelling part of his answer. During his first assignment Wajahat discovered that, unlike the rest of India, in Kashmir “the only active law was the Defence of India Rules, which allowed the police to keep their reasons for arrest and detention secret”. Though designed to tackle national security in wartime, in Kashmir they were used to enforce routine law and order. “Small wonder”, he concludes, “that a feeling of subjection had begun to permeate people’s minds”.

Whilst elsewhere in India elections provided a safety valve to ventilate anger, in Kashmir they became a means of denying freedom and subjecting the people to unrepresentative rule. Wajahat recounts the 4 steps by which elections were undermined. First, “reject the nomination of the opposition”. Second, impersonation during the voting “with the pliable presiding officer turning a blind eye to fake identification”. Third, “the ballot boxes could be stuffed with ballots”. And, fourth, “the winning and losing numbers were simply changed to favour the ‘preferred’ candidate”.

Two developments in the 1980s, Wajahat suggests, made the insurgency inevitable. The first was the midnight dismissal of the Farooq Abdullah government in 1984. At the heart of the problem was the clash between Farooq and Indira Gandhi. “She considered (him) a whippersnapper who owed her his position”. He sought to assert his independence, hosting opposition conclaves in Srinagar. Wajahat concludes: “The questionable manner of the Farooq government’s ouster confirmed Kashmiri suspicions that New Delhi would only allow supplicants to rule the state”.

The other was the election of 1987, rigged by the National Conference and Congress. Wajahat confirms that the voting in Amira Kadal was blatantly manipulated to ensure Yousuf Shah’s defeat, whilst his polling agents “were imprisoned without bail for months under the state’s draconian Public Safety Act”. Today, Yousuf Shah is better known as Syed Salahuddin, the head of the Hizbul Mujahideen and the Chief of the United Jehadi Council. Refusal to let the opposition win “drove a disaffected public into rebellion … convinced that freedom … was inaccessible”.

Twenty one years later, can harmony be restored? Wajahat suggests the happy summer of 2008 could be illusory: “It is doubtful whether harmony can ever be fully restored”. But if we want to try — and we must — Wajahat offers a small slender line of hope: “It had been clear to me from early on that resolution in Kashmir could come only with the restoration of Kashmiris’ dignity”.

With elections just three months away, isn’t it time to start? If the answer is yes, I suggest we begin with an apology. We owe them one.

9.5.09

Mir Jafar Deobandi Busharaf of MOSSAD.

.
.
.
.





Can you be a Mir Jafar, a Pakistani head of state, a former head of the Pakistan military, a deobandi Pak Sunni true believer who wages jihad against Shia's using Wahabi Arabs, a once true believer and backer of the Taliban, a man very comfortable in Western media circles craving their applause and attention, a puppet of Washington, a military hero chumping at the bit to attack India, AND work for MOSSAD ALL at the same time?


In Pakistan you can with a little guidance from America and Issshrahell.

It also helps if you are a little mixed up, morally and psychologically.

The only problem is we do not know which is the true Busharaf. Which of his many layers and faces are really his, or those of his foreign handlers. In the process of working for his foreign handlers since the 1960's, we do not know what % of his decisions were his or of his foreign handlers; particularly his critical career for Pakistan since the 1990's.

There is nothing to dislike the man personally, as I am not from Pakistan. However as one born in Bengal, with its history, the idea that the former head of state in Pakistan, and the head of the military is a foreign trained and guided agent is disturbing to say the least.

Consider Mir Jafar, the general who sold himself in order to get into power in Bengal, which he ultimately enjoyed only for a few short years. But the consequences of his ONE action had very serious negative consequences for countless millions of his countrymen, for generations after generations well after he died, even to this day, 252 years after that sad event of monumental betrayal to his people and nation.

Must I list the tragedies since that date?

Can we not forgive Mir Jafar?

After all it was one mistake, which with the help of hindsight he surely would not have made, and which his immediate relatives tried to rectify, under Mir Kassim at Buxor, with the help of allies from the UP. No, no, no, let us not compare Mir Jafar to Busharaf.............after all Busharaf has worked for the firaangi for four decades, covertly, hiding, lying with ample opportunities to reflect upon his choices and decisions, and to correct them. With Busharaf we are not talking about a one off lapse of judgment, and of misplaced loyalties and conscience.


But even with Mir Jafars one off mistake, given his position and responsibility, he inflicted a major catastrophe upon the people of Bengal and India. Quite rightly his name will forever live in infamy. Bengal the first major state to be conquered by the British, was the springboard which they used to conquer the rest of India, over a period of 100 years (1757--1849, cessation of Anglo-Sikh wars). It was the Bengal Presidency army of 150,000 by the 1790's which helped the British conquer India. The British Raj army that fought Tipu Sultan, the Maratha's, the Pindari and the Sikh's...........until it had enough of them, with their arrogance and misrule.

Not that this service to the empire was EVER repaid. 1769, 10 million Bengalis died from forced starvation, since the East India company required the growing of cash crops such as Indigo, jute and Opium instead of rice....30% of the population died...genocide. The systematic looting of the richest state in India, known as the "Pearl of India" before the Britsh arrived, into its most destitute part after the British conquered it. To this day Bangladesh, West Bengal, Bihar and Orissa constitute the most backward and poverty stricken parts of South Asia. Such is the legacy of British rule. .........252 years after they first set foot there, with Mir Jafars ONE unwitting mistake. The Pogroms against the local populations, mass rape, murder, the destruction of the vibrant local industry in the ensuing decades. The death of a few million more in forced starvation during 1943, just before independence.

Then the tragedy of East Pakistan/Bangladesh, by no means through chance and accidents, but the result of a British colonial mindset articulated through the post-colonial elite of Pakistan and the British trained Pakistan military......the economic exploitation over a quarter century, juxtaposed with the sheer evil brutality of the "Pakistan military" as a last farewell gesture, and the death of 3,000,000 civilians and the rape of 300,000 women can only be explained in the colonial context. But this too is Mir Jafar's legacy.

Bangladesh now, under British control is slowly sliding into the abyss. Its a member of the Commonwealth, still celebrating the magnificent British empire; it hosts British military advisers; it sends its best cadets to Sandhurst for top up training; and the two political parties of the left and right are more or less managed by the British; corrupt, worthless, useless, agenda less, bickering over nothing, doing absolutely nothing. This too is Mir Jafar's legacy.

Once one bad apple sets the tone, it is for the future generations to share the burden of the mistake of one man.

Are there Mir Jafars like Busharaf in the Pakistan military?......most certainly. The tragedy of Bengal does not have to be visited on Pakistan, we can learn from history and not allow it to repeat itself. We have the historical example of Bengal, and the stark example of Iraq and Afghanistan more recently. However at this moment in time, Pakistan is slowly sliding in that direction through the betrayal of the Pakistan military. Only the Pakistan military top brass. Solely the Pakistan military top brass.

We can avoid this.

The post below by Abid Ullah Jan at Dictatorship watch has been edited by me.


_____________________________________________

Musharraf had handlers in Mossad-US Agency at least since the 80's.

By Abid Ullah Jan.

The mysterious relationship between General Musharraf and the CIA began in the 60s at SSG – the special service group (commando unit at Cherat in NWFP). Mush stayed there for seven years – an unusually long period. Mush was recruited in by the CIA 1966. Mush stayed at SSG up to 1973. And then Mossad came in the picture when Musharraf went to Turkey for training.


However, how does it connect to Musharraf and him being the agent of foreign intelligence agencies long before he even thought that he would be the Commander in Chief?
Here are some tips for thoughtful, resourceful and brave researchers to find the truth about the real Musharraf and bring him to justice for treason and betrayal under his own Army Act:

- Question: Why was Musharraf fired in Oct. 1999?


- Tip –1 : Musharraf's illegal
foreign contacts are not so hidden either . Some were revealed, but no one will talk. They became state secrets. See the case of Javed Hashmi, for example.

- Tip – 2: In the 80s, there was a Journalist John Doe and his wife Agent Jane Doe, in Rawalpindi.
John Doe was divorcing his wife. It was in court. Musharraf was the representative of the lady Jane Doe in the court. Divorce happened but Mush made sure that John Doe did not open his mouth about the real reason behind the divorce in Public Court.

The real reason behind the journalist John Doe divorcing his wife was that she was an agent of a foreign intelligence agency. As John Doe discovered it, he no longer wanted to continue the marriage. Interestingly, journalist John Doe's wife was a very close relative of Musharraf.

- Tip – 3: This is authentic story. But to find out about the journalist John Doe and his wife Jane Doe in detail, one has to check the family court record in Rawalpindi. During the divorce proceedings Musharraf was the representative of the lady Jane Doe.

It shows that as an Army officer, Pervez Musharraf covered the connection of a lady to a foreign intelligence agency. Normally one is supposed to tell the authorities. That gives credence to the well founded allegations that he also had, and still has, foreign handlers.

How is it connected to 9/11? When I was doing my research into the ISI connection to 9/11, I gave General Musharraf a huge benefit of the doubt in the book, From BCCI to ISI: The Saga of Entrapment Continues. However, the deeper one goes, the more he realizes that it is almost impossible that ISI would be using its
human assets; its human assets will be linked to the CIA, M16 and others; the human assets will be meeting Osama and the foreign agencies at the same time; the Chief of the ISI will also be meeting his human assets as well as the high level officials in the US around the same time and also wiring money ($100,000) to the lead "hijacker” in the Operation 9/11.

Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad was never questioned by 911 commission, is a Tableeghi
Jamaat member with a long beard now. He maintains a house at Mai de Khoi, Faisalabad and one in Islamabad. He was chairman of a government entity like fertilizer corporation. Musharraf was never asked as to why he said," Daniel Pearl got over intrusive......". Why Omar Sheikh was never produced in an open court? And why Benazir talks of Omar Shiekh as the murderer of Osama with David Frost on November 2,2007?

Musharraf was the Director Military Intelligence when the CIA supported the creation of the Taliban/Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
Brig. Gen. Ejaz Shah was the handler of Omar Sheikh per Benazir. This shows Musharraf was very much part of 911 and cover up (of it being inside job with Dick Cheney at Command.

Musharraf's connections to foreign intelligence agencies
since the early period of his carrier suggests that he is not out of the loop when it comes to operation 9/11. He is one of the main culprits. If any other individual had sent even a dime to Atta, he might have died of waterboarding and other torture techniques by now. However, General Mohamoud is a free main in Pakistan. So despite deep connections to the alleged hijackers to the ISI, nothing happens to the Pakistani Generals or Pakistan as such. To the contrary, remember how former CIA director James Woolsey tried to prove Atta met Iraq security officials, but could not. That was the time when they were looking for justifications for the war of aggression on Iraq.

Eqbal Ahmad in 1998 said that Osama was just the excuse to go into the Oil lands......Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan. And his observation seems true. The warlords needed time. They needed moles at the highest positions, such as the Chief of Pakistan armed forces. Musharraf had to kill the Chief of Air staff Mushaf Ali Mir because he won't agree with Musharraf's policy and planning(Mushaf was a patriot). He had to depart. Mushaf died in a plane crash in clear weather in the most safest plane, along with his wife and closest confidants. Controversial author Gerald Posner implies that all of these events are linked together and the deaths are not accidental, but have occurred because of the testimony of captured al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida in March 2002 (see Early April 2002). The deaths all occurred not long after the respective governments were told of Zubaida’s confessions. This simply confirms foreign hand in Mushaf’s murder.

Benazir did not agree to Musharraf policies. Note that Musharraf says that she was "
very unpopular in the Army". Musharraf thinks he alone is the Army. Benazir would not budge on his uniform issue. She had to go.

Musharraf has violated his Oath five times. It is up to the Patriotic Army men to understand the situation and
use the Army Act on Musharraf to protect Pakistan from internal aggression.



Abid Ullah Jan is the author of "The Musharraf Factor" and edit www.dictatorshipwatch.com.


___________________________________________


The above article by Abid Ullah Jan is well researched. However he misses the most serious crimes of Busharaf, among many which need to be focused on:

It is alleged Busharaf as Brigadier in the late 1980's, and later as Major-general organized Arab Wahabi with Pashtun Sunni Jehadis, to wage war against Pakistanis who were Shia in the NWFP and the Northern territories. And that that policy has continued since then into 2009, at a much reduced level through the Pakistan military controlled Taliban. Creating a civil war scenario like Iraq, besides the human cost against fellow Pakistanis.

Busharf along with three other generals planned the Kargil war, in order to undermine the Sharif government, which was seeking comprehensive peace with India, which in turn had it been realized would have strengthened the position of the Sharif government and increased its international stature. The war with India besides being illegal by the standards of International law, was poorly planned and carried out, without the slightest intention of winning; no regular heavy units were committed to that campaign, but instead poorly armed and trained irregulars, NLI and a few SSG. Busharaf and his pals casually strolled into war against a nuclear foe, and reportedly playing golf at the height of the brief war. Besides the loss of prestige for the military, and the nation, about 4,000 men died on Pakistan's side.

Finally of course Busharafs participation in the "al-Qaeda" GWOT myth, and the handing over of 650 innocent mostly Afghans with Pakistanis, to legitimate and reinforce the JEWUSA lie.

There are no crimes greater that even comes close to what Busharf has done against Pakistan. That he is being slowly groomed to retake power by his American backers, and he conspires thus extensively for his American masters in Pakistan is an absolute outrage.

_______________________________________



BUT Busharaf is one man, and one thinks there are other foreign backed agents in the Pakistan military......it could be Kiyani, or more likely Suja Pasha, head of the ISI.

We see what happened to Iraq when the Americans bought the entire intelligence, and military of Saddam, before they invaded the country and "liberated" it. 1.2 million Iraqis dead; 4.5 million internal and external refugees; the country ethnically cleansed into three separate parts, with three different administrations; the levels of physical destruction to the country, and the JEWUSA is not done yet.....they are going to be there for another few decades.

A lot of Pakistan's problems could be solved if the Pakistan military is sorted out, and the American's distanced from interfering with Pakistani affairs.

If not, then its the legacy of Mir Jafar again.........and an unfolding tragedy for generations to come. For Pakistanis there are ample historical warnings of such things.

Pakistanis must not be shy in seeking out the Mir Jafars amongst them.




2.5.09

de-coupling from the USA strategy.

.
.
.
.
If the American administration wish to invade Pakistan, Pakistan would need to be under a dictatorship, a military dictatorship. Democracies never attack another Democracy. India , the USA on this rule could never attack Pakistan. The next best thing would be of course to say that Pakistan is not a fully functioning Democracy, in the present circumstances........or Pakistan needs more American "help". So it is clear where ALL is this vilification is going.

The best policy for Pakistanis is to rally around a civilian administration which is effective, and press the Pakistan military to deal with the Pakistan Taliban first right into the Swat Valley; dismantle the Kashmiri insurgency against India, and close down the 40 odd training camps based in Pakistan. Then wind-up the Afghan Taliban based in and around Quetta. Finally deny that "al-Qaeda" exists in Pakistan, or at all if you can.



____________________________________________________________

Obama Is Lying About Pakistan.

By Ahmed Quraishi.

Mr. Obama used a domestic event to ‘accidentally’ declare war on Pakistan. Now his team is trying to encourage the Pakistani military to seize power. The Americans destroyed Pakistan’s stability through the Benazir-Musharraf deal in 2007. They are doing it again. Here is the easiest way of telling the Americans to: Lay off, stop lecturing us on India, stop supporting separatism, and mend your ways in Afghanistan.

(Yes that was a shameful cynical statement by Obama about Pakistan, in light of conditions in Afghanistan, Iraq under American control, with Somalia. Though of course there is a certain amount of truth in what he said, but never the less he should not have said it.........I think if you accept $23 billion worth of begging money from America you should get used to hearing such lectures from Obama.)

There is not a single towering personality in the Pakistani landscape today, with enough credibility, strong personality and effective communication skills, to stand up and tell U.S. President Barack Obama: You are a liar.

(Indeed not. Why so Ahmed? I have been pondering this question for 30 years....its not easy. Is it a racial question? Are Pakistanis the type of people, with the tendency to exhibit the characteristics of certain types of races: an excessive amount of savagery and treachery towards ones own kind, and a subservient mentality towards Western countries such the USA, and UK. Yes, Yes, Yes Americans do this bad thing, that bad thing and the other against Pakistan, but ultimately a nation of 180 million strong people can surely take their destiny into their own hands. A nation like Pakistan, unlike Mexico, so far away from the meddling of America, and so close to India, an untried and unexplored FRIEND, and China...........and Iran.)

It is not difficult to respond to the entire American psy-ops on Pakistan, which are built on half-truths, disinformation and in some cases outright lies. (This is precisely what psy-ops is about) This campaign is successful mainly because of the broad influence of the media in setting the world news agenda.

(The Jews control the American media; Bill Clinton the Democrat's passed legislation in the 1990's, which helped big Jewish media groups further concentrate/consolidate their control of most of the American media, and the same is true of the UK media, and Europe..................that is why you get an uniform type of message and hype about Pakistan's "failed" situation. You are a media person so you should understand this, more than the average person.

You say they are successful, so are you saying you have succumbed to their propaganda? Are you saying they are successful, according to whom? By what measure of policies slavishly followed through by Pakistani administrations. What American policies have been slavishly followed through and obeyed by the Pakistan military yet again, against the interests of ordinary Pakistanis, covertly and overtly?

I have clearly stated that there is no Taliban threat to Pakistan, just a scare crow used by the Pakistan military to get back into power.............thus it is the actions of the Pakistan military within Pakistan which is endangering the Pakistani state, as they have since independence)


Before listing the exact points where Mr. Obama is lying, let me briefly sum up the existing situation.

AMERICA’S PLAYGROUND

In less than two years, the United States has successfully managed to drop from news headlines its failure to pacify Afghanistan. The focus of the Anglo-American media – American and British – has been locked on Pakistan. In order to justify this shift, multiple insurgencies and endless supply of money and weapons has trickled from U.S.-occupied Afghanistan into Pakistan to sustain a number of warlords inside Pakistan whom the American media calls ‘Taliban’ but they are actually nothing but hired mercenaries with sophisticated weapons who mostly did not even exist as recently as the year 2005.

( I have not heard of these foreign backed warlords, who are they? Baitullah Mehsud is easily accessible by the Pakistan media, where he gives numerous interviews to publicize his cause, and has no problems moving around FATA....and at most he has at his command a just a few thousand fighters lightly armed with ak-47, if that.........although there is talk of him being foreign backed, but all the indications are that he is an operative of the Pakistan military, out to scare ordinary Pakistanis and into the reassuring arms of the Pakistani military. Besides Mesud who else, lets name names, and the size of their forces, and from which camps in Afghanistan, and who specifically in Afghanistan is arming/training them.)

No other nation in the world would have tolerated half the arrogance that the Americans are showing Pakistan. But thanks to a mistake by former President Musharraf – sometime in late 2006 when he consented to allow the U.S. to manipulate domestic politics through direct engagement with Benazir Bhutto and other players – Washington was given a free hand to deal directly with individual players inside Pakistan and recruit supporters and proxies.

(But Pakistan has for the better part of well over half a century and never learns. Indeed it is the Pakistan military which has this love affair with America, and not so much the sidelined civilian politicians within Pakistan.

"Busharaf" made a lot of mistakes, not just one................he used to love giving personal interviews on the American media, and the ego massaging lime light. In Pakistan it is still not known what concessions he gave to the Americans after 2001, the American military bases in Pakistan, and the conditions of the nuclear weapons there.......the propagation of the 9/11 lies that "al-Qaeda' did it, and the handing over of innocent Afghans, Pakistanis and Arabs premised on that lie to be subsequently tortured, murdered, raped and humiliated based on what he knew was a lie. Busharaf as President of Pakistan, followed American dictates about sensitive Pakistan internal politics without questioning them as America's number one puppet in the country............Busharaf did not make one mistake, he made many that is why he is out of power after serving America for 9 years)


Today, there are many parties inside Pakistan that are pushing the U.S. agenda and very few of those who would come out and condemn how the U.S. media and officials are single-handedly tarnishing Pakistan’s image worldwide to justify a military intervention.

(The only people that tarnish Pakistan's image are Pakistanis. The larger than life criminal colorful politicians; the tin pot generals with their broken English. The Pakistan military through its history since independence has played a major role in that. It is not yesterdays problem but a cumulative problem over many decades. Some sections of the American Jewish media "help" with that long process........Ahmed just do a little self reflecting once in a while, it does no harm)

This is precisely why senior Pakistani military officers are gradually coming out of their self-imposed ban on public activity to counter this nasty American psy-ops. April, Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, in the words of an official press release, “condemned pronouncements by outside powers raising doubts on the future of the Country,” a veiled reference to a spate of official U.S. statements and planted media reports predicting the collapse of the Pakistani state.Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman issued a statement saying that PAF “will continue to maintain its optimum operational readiness to undertake all types of missions against all internal and external threats … Pakistan Air Force is capable of providing instant support to Pak Army as and when directed by Government of Pakistan. To keep PAF at the highest state of Operational Readiness is my number one priority,” the Air Chief said in a public statement.

(Really it is naive to think by merely issuing statements that somehow mischievous foreigners with negative intentions will stop their propaganda against Pakistan. Pakistan is failed state number 9. Whilst America has contributed to this, of course, ultimately the responsibility of the mess falls on Pakistanis, its leaders and especially the Pakistan military who have ruled the country for most of Pakistan's history...........38 years military rule VS 24 years civilian rule...........After 1954 with the signing of the $1 billion aid package and the creation of CENTO, defacto the Pakistan military were running the country unofficially, after they killed Laiqat Ali Khan. 1954----1972, 1977---1988 after thy killed Zulfikar Bhutto, 1999---2008, and my guess is thy would have liked to done far worse against Sharif then they actually did.

The characteristics of a failed state for your benefit Ahmed and your friends in the Pakistan military from Wikipedia:

Social indicators

  1. Demographic pressures: including the pressures deriving from high population density relative to food supply and other life-sustaining resources. The pressure from a population's settlement patterns and physical settings, including border disputes, ownership or occupancy of land, access to transportation outlets, control of religious or historical sites, and proximity to environmental hazards.
  2. Massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples: forced uprooting of large communities as a result of random or targeted violence and/or repression, causing food shortages, disease, lack of clean water, land competition, and turmoil that can spiral into larger humanitarian and security problems, both within and between countries.
  3. Legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievance: based on recent or past injustices, which could date back centuries. Including atrocities committed with impunity against communal groups and/or specific groups singled out by state authorities, or by dominant groups, for persecution or repression. Institutionalized political exclusion. Public scapegoating of groups believed to have acquired wealth, status or power as evidenced in the emergence of "hate" radio, pamphleteering and stereotypical or nationalistic political rhetoric.
  4. Chronic and sustained human flight: both the "brain drain" of professionals, intellectuals and political dissidents and voluntary emigration of "the middle class." Growth of exile/expat communities are also used as part of this indicator.

Economic indicators

  1. Uneven economic development along group lines: determined by group-based inequality, or perceived inequality, in education, jobs, and economic status. Also measured by group-based poverty levels, infant mortality rates, education levels.[9]
  2. Sharp and/or severe economic decline: measured by a progressive economic decline of the society as a whole (using: per capita income, GNP, debt, child mortality rates, poverty levels, business failures.) A sudden drop in commodity prices, trade revenue, foreign investment or debt payments. Collapse or devaluation of the national currency and a growth of hidden economies, including the drug trade, smuggling, and capital flight. Failure of the state to pay salaries of government employees and armed forces or to meet other financial obligations to its citizens, such as pension payments.

Political indicators

  1. Criminalization and/or delegitimisation of the state: endemic corruption or profiteering by ruling elites and resistance to transparency, accountability and political representation. Includes any widespread loss of popular confidence in state institutions and processes.
  2. Progressive deterioration of public services: a disappearance of basic state functions that serve the people, including failure to protect citizens from terrorism and violence and to provide essential services, such as health, education, sanitation, public transportation. Also using the state apparatus for agencies that serve the ruling elites, such as the security forces, presidential staff, central bank, diplomatic service, customs and collection agencies.
  3. Widespread violation of human rights: an emergence of authoritarian, dictatorial or military rule in which constitutional and democratic institutions and processes are suspended or manipulated. Outbreaks of politically inspired (as opposed to criminal) violence against innocent civilians. A rising number of political prisoners or dissidents who are denied due process consistent with international norms and practices. Any widespread abuse of legal, political and social rights, including those of individuals, groups or cultural institutions (e.g., harassment of the press, politicization of the judiciary, internal use of military for political ends, public repression of political opponents, religious or cultural persecution.)
  4. Security apparatus as ‘state within a state’: an emergence of elite or praetorian guards that operate with impunity. Emergence of state-sponsored or state-supported private militias that terrorize political opponents, suspected "enemies," or civilians seen to be sympathetic to the opposition. An "army within an army" that serves the interests of the dominant military or political clique. Emergence of rival militias, guerrilla forces or private armies in an armed struggle or protracted violent campaigns against state security forces.
  5. Rise of factionalised elites: a fragmentation of ruling elites and state institutions along group lines. Use of aggressive nationalistic rhetoric by ruling elites, especially destructive forms of communal irredentism (e.g., "Greater Serbia") or communal solidarity (e.g., "ethnic cleansing", "defending the faith").
  6. Intervention of other states or external factors: military or Para-military engagement in the internal affairs of the state at risk by outside armies, states, identity groups or entities that affect the internal balance of power or resolution of the conflict. Intervention by donors, especially if there is a tendency towards over-dependence on foreign aid or peacekeeping missions.

Now all this was not created by Obama who came to power a few days ago, or by America. These are fundamental weaknesses of the Pakistani state that ONLY righteous patriotic Pakistanis can tackle to make their country stronger. It is the inherent nature of predatory powers such as the USA or UK to "exploit" the weaknesses of Third World nations for their benefit............Afghanistan/ narcotics.................Iraq/free oil/destruction of Arab country which the Israelis historically feared........Somalia/strategic placed nation with vast untapped mineral potentials..............and so on. America and the UK dominated by Jews are fat greedy grasping bastards, with criminal intent, using their power with flowery diplomatic language who will never be satisfied by their own needs. But it is not about crying and crying why me? But making Pakistan stronger as a nation.

This involves the leading personalities within the nation taking a hard look at Pakistan's internal weaknesses, and trying to solve them. This is much harder and demanding than merely blaming ALL Pakistan's problems on the USA, the county which Pakistan turns to for begging, military hardware, military training, political direction and opinion.....you Ahmed convey the language of a 15 year old with your logic and expressions of frustration, living under the roof of an American big daddy. If Pakistan is so unhappy then the country should leave the American home. Your military having so many meetings with Mullen and the army of American officials who come to advise the country, again and again. The American military bases in Pakistan. The drone attacks by America against Pakistani civilians from Pakistani military bases in Baluchistan.

As to the Air Marshals comment, meaningless fodder of an automated response.)


And on 1 May, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Gen. Tariq Majeed called a meeting of the military leadership and an official statement made sure to underscore that “the meeting took place against the backdrop of widespread propaganda unleashed by the western media about the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.The military statement was being nice. The propaganda was not unleashed by the ‘Western media’ but exclusively by the American media.

( I'll give the solution to the above problem for free:

1. Debunk the "al-Qaeda" myth, say OBL is dead, and there is no "al-Qaeda " in Pakistan.

2. Stop the Pakistan army using fundamentalist proxies in Pakistan, Afghanistan and India as an extension of its strategies.

3. Support good effective civilian governments in Pakistan, and marginalize the corrupt ones.

If the Pakistan army follows my advise, a great deal of the problems of the country will go away. No more threats of invasion from America, India or anybody else. The Pakistan military by its covert/overt conduct invite destabilization and threats to the country----this can be avoided only if the Pakistan military changes its ways. One or the other.)

This unusual series of public statements by the Pakistani military leadership was an indirect repudiation of the sheepish attitude of the Pakistani politicians who failed to reflect the will of the Pakistani people. Amazingly, while U.S. officials continued their propaganda about the imminent fall of Islamabad Pakistan, in the hands of unknown terrorists, not a single official from the elected government came out to clarify the position from a Pakistani perspective. The world continued to feed on U.S. propaganda and psy-ops for several days until the public statements from the Pakistani military set the record straight. That is when a couple of government officials, like President’s Advisor Dr. Babar Awan, released statements contradicting the U.S. propaganda.

(No you have been selective in what you are saying.....the civilian leadership have stated repeatedly that Pakistan's nuclear weapons are safe, and that Islamabad is also secure. However civilians politicians administration speeches have to be guided somewhat by what the military ultimately do in Pakistan)

Interestingly, even Mr. Nawaz Sharif, supposedly the opposition leader, refrained from criticizing the aggressive posturing toward Pakistan. Mr. Sharif, more vengeful than statesmanlike, is hoping these days that Washington will support his bid to become the next all-powerful President after the Americans ditch a weakened President Zardari.

Nawaz Sharif in power can be managed for the benefit of all; he won't work miracles but he will do better than Zardari.

(I think he will make a better PM with the requisite administration than Zardari........and that he should be given that chance sooner rather than later in 2013. I would like the present administration to fall through a vote of no confidence, where the ANP leave the coalition, or through the initiation of corruption probes into Zardari which encourages him to leave office sooner rather than later.........Zardari with his antics is clearly a failure, and never should have been President of the country.

The military coming back into power is not the solution, for Pakistan for sure. Once you have an illegitimate dictatorship in Pakistan, the Americans will have no problems attacking the country much more comprehensively----------that has been the whole strategy of backing Islamic fundamentalists since the 1970's in places such as Egypt, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other Muslim countries usually through the military------once you DE-LEGITIMATE A COUNTRY YOU can mobilize the "coalition of the willing" against it:

The Fall of the Shah

Londonistan

The ISI

The fifth column of Islamic fundamentalism

Hamas Son of Israel

al-Qaeda, the global Renamo

Fake al-Qaeda

GWOT over 100 years

al-Qaeda tool of the West

Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington

The Great Game

Bernard Lewis


To prevent this covert plan since the 1970's Pakistan must have:

1. Effective democratically elected civilian governments.

2. The military must cease backing proxy fundamentalist groups.

3.
Debunk the "al-Qaeda" myth, say OBL is dead, and there is no "al-Qaeda " in Pakistan.

4. Tackle the failed state weaknesses of Pakistan, and make the country a success story, which does not require American "liberation")


OBAMA’S LIES

Mr. Obama basically chose a domestic event – a press briefing on completing 100 days in office – to unveil what essentially amounts to a declaration of war against another country. The declaration was stage-managed to look accidental and not deliberate. Considering the serious nature of his pronouncements, there is no question these were well prepared in advance. This ‘accidental’ declaration of war should henceforth be taught in public relations classes as a classic lesson in how to deceive your public and voters and declare war without raising any alarm.

( I think America has legitimate concerns about Pakistan. Obama as President of that country has the right to make statements around that, but not to undermine the civilian government which he did. That was wrong. Its one thing for a blogger to criticize Zardari's government, quite another for an American President. If as a country you are benefiting from a $23 billion beggar money, from the USA mainly then you must remain silent and listen, OR not take any money at all)

Mr. Obama first made an astonishing remark, that he is concerned about the fate of the elected Pakistani government because it cannot provide services to the people. Ironically, this was a swipe at the fake democracy that itself helped erect a year ago with its direct intervention to bring Benazir Bhutto and later her husband Asif Zardari to power.

(But inherently true, as a failed state Pakistan does not provide the full services to its peoples as it should.............the security problems in Pakistan in large parts are the result of fundamental socio-economic problems within Pakistan and the actions of the Pakistan military....the fact that Zardari can't govern, everybody even in Pakistan knows this to be true.)

Now the U.S. President, no less, has taken it upon himself to criticize the ability of what he called the “civilian government”, as opposed to a military government, to provide for the people.

(If you take $23 billion beggar money from the USA, so you must listen to such shameful lectures)

Washington is trying to nudge the Pakistani military again to seize power. The Americans are doing it in subtle ways. One is Obama’s swipe. A second way is what Adm. Mike Mullen, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, has done. He was allowed to join the panel of the U.S. Time magazine in choosing Gen. Kayani, the Pakistani army chief, to be among the top 2o most influential people in the world. To work up Gen. Kayani’s ego, Adm. Mullen wrote the following words:

“I don't remember all the details of my first meeting with General Ashfaq Kayani, the Pakistan army's Chief of Staff. (Quite a few since then) But I do remember thinking, Here is a man with a plan, a leader who knows where he wants to go. He seemed to understand the nature of the extremist threat inside Pakistan, recognized that his army wasn't ready to meet that threat and had already started working up solutions.”

(Yes rather obvious interference by the USA government officers in Pakistan's internal affairs. I hope Kiyani does not fall for it. The problems of Pakistan will not disappear if the Pakistan military take over. What the Pakistan military needs and what the country needs is Sharif to come to power through fresh fair elections, and the Pakistan military to work with his administrations and manage him for the betterment of Pakistan.....NOT creating unwarranted competition as to who is better at running Pakistan at this delicate juncture, through the games of America. Sharif can be managed as a national leader.)

The Americans are obviously hoping they can have Gen. Kayani in their pockets and use him to achieve their goals in the region. That is why President Obama in his ‘accidental’ speech on Pakistan shed these crocodile tears: "I'm more concerned that the civilian government there right now is very fragile.” And in another nudge for the Pakistani military, what President Obama’s top general for Pakistan and Afghanistan told an American television channel was even more damning. Fox News reported on Thursday that Commander U.S. Central Command Gen. David Petraeus has told officials the next two weeks were ‘critical to determining whether the Pakistani government will survive.’

(Again another uncalled for interference in Pakistan, and one which the Pakistan military should ignore. The Afghan Taliban didn't conquer Afghanistan after 7 years of hard fighting, numbering 50,000 with personnel embedded from the Pakistan military, logistics from Pakistan and finance from the Gulf.

There is absolutely no inconceivable chance that the 3,000 Swat Taliban could conquer the whole of Pakistan in two weeks. Unless the 800,000 Pakistan military backed by 300,000 paramilitary stood down completely on the orders of Mullen. If that were the case, then it would be much easier and less dangerous for the country if the Pakistan military just took over the country and ejected the Civilian government.......which has just now successfully begged $23 billion out of the USA, and the international community. One also does not think the international community gave $23 billion just so that the Pak military could take over the country and benefit from that huge amount of money. The Swat Taliban are Pakistan military proxies. )


But in what is sure to be one of the most hypocritical statements to ever come out from the mouth of the leader of the Free World, Mr. Obama said this: "We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests -- huge national security interests -- in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don't end up having a nuclear-armed militant state."

(Its hypocritical BUT true, and only the Pakistan military can debunk this myth for Pakistan)

If Mr. Husain Haqqani, the Pakistani ambassador in Washington who basically is the overseer of the Bhutto-Musharraf deal that brought the present ‘democracy’ to Pakistan, has any feelings for his country, he should call an important press conference and tell the American people the following truths that their media and politicians are hiding from them:

  • American Anti-Pakistanism: The most spectacular, anti-Pakistan media campaign ever against our country has been launched by the U.S. media and continues unabated, with the purpose of softening the international opinion for a possible military action against Pakistan. And there is no question that this campaign has some backing from official U.S. quarters as was the case in the propaganda that preceded the invasion of Iraq.(So long as Pakistan remains a democracy, it will be difficult for the USA to attack Pakistan dirctly...................whatever their intentions. In addition better relations with India might be good for Pakistan, so that the Eastern Border is secure)
  • Stop Grooming & Training Separatists Inside Pakistan: With prodding from CIA, academic programs are being launched in the U.S.that advocate the breakup of Pakistan and the creation of smaller entities. This has to stop.(In a free world American Think Tanks and academic circles are free to advocate whatever they like. Pakistan, beggar Pakistan can hardly dictate to the Americans what a few Americans can do or think can they?)
  • Terrorism Inside Pakistan Is Not The Story: America’s failure to bring peace to Afghanistan despite the passage of seven years on its direct occupation of the country. Terrorism in Pakistan is a result of the American failure in Afghanistan. We trusted the Americans. And what did they do? They let Osama bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, and then the Americans refused to listen to our advice and filled the puppet government in Kabul with the same people who helped Osama escape.( Actually it is if it is percieved that the Taliban as terrorists are about to take over Pakistan; the Pakistan military surrender to them on their terms; if they are lodged a few miles from Islamabad; if 2,000 people die in one year from their acts........and so on. The failures of Pakistan within the country, is the failure of the civilian administration along with the none cooperation of the military to deal with the Islamist problem......OBL was allowed to escape by America because the Americans need a continuation of the myth to justify its actions in Afghanistan, AND Pakistan. In maintaining this myth/lie the Pakistan military have aided the Americans, and justified their illegal presence in Afghanistan, and their subsequent actions in Pakistan.The question then is who in the Pakistan military has the balls to say that OBL is dead; "al-Qaeda" does not exist in Pakistan at least, it is irrelevant in Pakistan, and that the Pakistan Taliban can be easily manageable and can be easily defeated by the Pakistan military, without much affort.....this provides reassurance to the country and the international community. Peace terms, with Sharia Law which are dictated by the Swat Taliban does not.)
  • Don’t Lecture Us On India: The United States and its sidekick, Britain, have decided that India will be their slave-soldier in Asia in the 21 century. They want India to fight China and stabilize Afghanistan. They now want Pakistan to accept Indian military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan, forget about Kashmir and the water disputes, and turn the Pakistani military into a little more than a local police force tasked with killing anyone who doesn’t like America’s occupation of Afghanistan.(Why not? Why can't the Americans lecture Pakistan? They have been doing it for the better part of 50 years.......and the Pakistan civilian and military leadership have been obeying such lectures....this is what Ayub Khan did, Yahya Khan, Zia ul Haq, and Busharaf.........so whats new? Why change traditions? In fact it is the civilian leaders of Pakistan who have shown some independence from the American Masters....credit to them. ..............................The only slave soldier in South Asia of the Americans and British have been the Pakistan military, hosting American military bases in Pakistan; taking billions $ worth of military aid; cooperation in GWOT and the maintenance of the "al-Qaeda" myth; handing over 650 people as 'al-Qaeda"; extensive military training programs with America; Cooperation in "Operation Cyclone", "Operation Greenbelt"------basically American operations where Pakistan played its part as slave soldiers; Pakistani military advisers under Brigadier Zia ul Haq, in Jordan which squashed the 1970 Palestinian uprising in that country; military advisers in Oman, Saudi, and the Gulf States............the backing of the Taliban at the behest of the Americans from 1994; the largest UN contribution compared to any other country in peace keeping ops as a USA certified Slave soldiers {Take a good look at the Pakistani military, how it conducts itself, how the officers talk, and tell me Ahmed honestly if that is the heritage of Allauddin Kilji, Babur, Akbar, Sher Shah or a Third Rate copy of the British colonial military from the 1930's, which not only looks like a colonial military but acts like one, waging its most vicious wars against its own people overtly or covertly}........On the other side of the coin Pakistan can't lecture the USA, if the USA decides to invite greater Indian participation in Afghanistan. Nothing Pakistan can do about that, especially if America wants to use India to invade Pakistan. However Pakistan can counter such a policy simply by winding down insurgency operations in Kashmir, and forgetting about it, closing the military bases which train the Kashmir insurgency; sign an FTA with India and legalise the LOC. This would be a better policy than simply complaining, "Oh Mr. USA why are you so nasty and mean to me? Why don't you consider my feelings?" again, again, again

  • Its always the Civilian politicians fault, or the USA fault, or the Indians fault........but never the Pakistan military......."The Best military in the world"...right?)
  • India IS Pakistan’s enemy until proven otherwise through actions and not words: Someone has to teach Mrs. Clinton, President Obama and their other team members some lessons in strategy. India continues to prove by actions that it is an enemy of Pakistan. This does not apply to the people of India but it certainly applies to their government and their intelligence services, their media, and their ‘non-state actors’. The world should know that India in 1972 launched a unilateral invasion of Pakistan exploiting a domestic political crisis and helped break up Pakistan. We have never done anything similar to India before that year. This naked aggression by India was never condemned by the so-called leaders of the free world and continues to be overlooked. India is portrayed as a responsible country despite having committed aggression against a smaller neighbor without provocation. Can the Americans guarantee India will not do this again?(We should not distort history, after all these years. Pakistan attacked India in 1965 illegally, and India was looking to get even, since they knew that East Pakistan was guarded by one weak division in the mid 1960's, and the local population were none too happy with Pakistani rule for justifiable reasons, related to unequal development, the Indians naturally after 1965 wanted to exploit that........if they didn't they would have been complete idiots (RE: Baluchistan, and NWFP.......East Pakistan scenario). In March 25th 1971 the Pakistani military started a genocidal war against the local people----as a result of the operations of the Pakistan military, about 10 million Bangadesh refugees flooded into India and then the internal matter of East Pakistan became India's concern, through the 10 million refugee issue, whom India had to care for. The Indians backed the Bangladesh liberation movement, training them, arming them, feeding them...and by december 1971 when the war ended there were anything...between 80,000---300,000 armed freedom fighters courtesy of India. By November 1971 the freedom fighters became very aggressive and pressed the Pakistan military, and slowly they were backed by Indian support units, liberating pockets of East Pakistan. On December the 3rd Pakistan attacked India unilaterally in the Western sector, to relieve pressure in the Eastern sector, thus initiating the war with India officially, and the war ended within 13 days.....All along the way it was Pakistani provocation and Indian response to that provocation. Even with the Pakistani provocation, India finally commited to attacking the East Pakistan forces with American approval)
  • The Afghan Taliban Are Not A Threat To America: The Afghan Taliban have never operated outside their country and are attacking American and other occupation forces inside Afghanistan as a result of the occupation. Washington should stop deliberately confusing the world about the difference between the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda. The al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that should be eliminated, and has considerably been eliminated.(No realistically not. The Afghan Taliban have not really made any real impact against the Occupation Forces in Afghanistan)
  • Eliminating Afghan Taliban Is Not Pakistan’s Responsibility: It is America’s responsibility to bring the Pashtun in Afghanistan into the power structure and defuse tensions.(If the Afghan Taliban and Mulla Omer are headquatered in Quetta, and provided support by the Pakistan military, yes they are. America is in a neo-colonial narco-profit mission in Afghanistan which means you suppress the dominant group in a country, the Pashtuns, and bolster the position of the minority through the Northern Alliance....the Tajiks. Incidently the Jews who run America are also doing just that to the traditional dominant group in America through open border immigration, and flooding the country with Hispanics/Latino....The dominant group will be a minority in a few decades. Olla! Maniyana!)
  • So-called Pakistani Taliban Are No Threat To America: Although money and weapons for these militants are coming from U.S-controlled Afghanistan, many of the recruits and fighters are Pakistanis and we will deal with them any way we deem fit. It is not for Washington to decide how we do this.(They are percieved as a threat by America if they seem like taking over Pakistan, with its nuke weapons...........then they are a threat to America theoretically. To counter that crucial image the Pakistan military need to cease making peace deals with the likes of the Swat Taliban and actually fight them, and roll them back...............As to the origins of the Swat Taliban and Mehsud's actual state backing, one can only summise that since the Pakistan military regularly negotiates with them, legitimates them by giving them concessions, surrenders to them by allowing them to take even more Pakistan territory, without a real fight; allow them to turn back whole units of the military when the Swat Taliban erect road blocks; allow them to run radio stations non-stop........then they can only do so with the tacit approval of the Pakistan military..........they must be Pakistan's military proxies, there can be no other logical explanation for this, absolutely nothing else you can spin Ahmed. The reason why many of them cover their faces........because they are either serving military or ex-military; Pashtuns are not noted for their shyness unless working on a covert mission for the Pakistan military)

Is this going to be another Vietnam?

.
.
.
.


.
. . . I don't know is this really a good idea? Is Pakistan's fundamental national/failed state problems solvable through military avenues.................more American military advisers, more military aid......I never thought so, and I thought that was the implicit understanding of the current Washington regime with the emphasis on economic aid rather than security aid; the latter which the Bush junta emphasized to a great degree, with the ensuing mess in Pakistan.

No Pakistan most definitely does not need the Vietnam solution.

Pakistan does not need more American military trainers training them inside or outside Pakistan; this only increases the negative perception of the Pakistan military within Pakistan, as a tool of Washington.

What Pakistan needs, and the original and only mistake of America in South Vietnam, is in Pakistan's case honestly back competent uncorrupted populist civilian regimes in Islamabad. That is the winning ticket for success in Pakistan, and for America around the world in all Third World nations. The Papa Doc Duvalier, the General Noriega's and the Ferdinand Marcos SOB of America have got to be relegated, and age old racist foreign policy perceptions and modes ditched for American foreign policy to survive in the 21st century.


Also it is not a lack of numbers (800,000 Pakistan military unofficially, with 300,000 paramilitary), or a lack of equipment (2,000 artillery pieces, 2500 tanks, 450 jet fighters) or a lack of training (see the performance of some of the operations of the Pakistan military trained LeT, JeM against the Indian army) that results in the "failure" of the Pakistan military against the 3,000 Swat Taliban armed with AK-47, it is a simple lack of will.

On a more sinister level, but probably accurate given Pakistan's military history with their MO, is that the Swat Taliban are proxies of the Pakistan military, out to threaten and destabilize the civilian government and thus allow the military to get back into power.


In that light what Obama said last Friday (1/5/2009) was highly destabilizing for Pakistan, and shameful, as President of America in a major platform for him. Now I know its all the rage to show Jew sympathy whilst putting the boot in (This is being Jew clever), but ALL Pakistanis whether in the military or as civilians should be aware of such double dealing. The Democrat Party of America is the Jew party of America par excellence...80% of American Jews traditionally vote for the Party, and for this reason alone, and in relations to the Israeli 30 year goal of neutralizing Pakistan's nuclear bomb capabilities, Pakistanis must be wary of the intentions of the Obama regime towards the country, especially now.


They must not draw false naive assumptions of American intentions from the huge aid that Pakistan is being given right now........$7.5 billion annual economic aid, $7.6 billion IMF loan, $5.28 billion International assistance, and $ 3 billion military assistance----$23 billion........all this is NOTHING, NOTHING if the American's call you the most dangerous nation on earth, destabilize the country, and then use the pretext of Islamist are taking over Pakistan's nuke assets to invade the country, and eventual occupation..........which causes $300 billion worth of damage to Pakistan; the death of 8 million Pakistani civilians like Iraq; and 20 million Pakistani refugees in India like Iraqis in Syria and Jordan selling themselves for one Dinar to survive.


No more military assistance for the Pakistan military. Lets focus on the content of the Pakistan military.

Why are there so many beards in the Pakistan military?

Why are there so many beards in senior positions in the Pakistan military?



Why are there so many beards in senior positions in the Pakistan military, which are then sent for training in America?

From what type of background are the mullahs of the Pakistan military recruited from? Who are these mullahs?

Why did the Pakistan military surrender to the Swat Taliban, and then advise the Islamabad civilian government to negotiate with the Swat Taliban terrorists, which gave them legitimacy?



Why does Mullen keep visiting Pakistan so often?

When will the Americans end their illegal occupation of Afghanistan, and ease the problems on Pakistan by doing this?

For how long do the Americans intend to support failed regimes, and non-governance in Afghanistan, before they lecture Pakistan about the same?

How much drugs money profits do the Jew want to make through Afghanistan, before the Jew decides to call it a day?


Was the Vietnam war (1965-75) about controlling drugs trade for the Jew (successful), or about fighting Jewish Communism (unsuccessful)?

What fucking bright new ideas will the Jew come up with, and how do we discern what is a Jew policy, and "American foreign policy" ?


______________________________________________

Obama: ‘We Want to Respect Pakistan’s Sovereignty, But…’

US Eyes Expanded Intervention in Pakistan

by Jason Ditz of Antiwar.com

President Barack Obama had nothing but good things to say about Pakistan’s military, cheering them for recognizing the “misguided” concern with a prospective Indian invasion and recognizing, in his words, “that their biggest threat right now comes internally.”

But with regards to the nation’s civilian government, Obama was anything but supportive. While criticizing it as “very fragile” and incapable of delivering basic services, the US president declared “We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests, huge national security interests in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don’t end up having a nuclear-armed militant state.”

While pressuring Congress to support “urgent” aid to Pakistan, the Obama Administration intends to significantly expand the nascent US military training program in the nation. Reportedly the president will discuss the matter with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari during his visit next week, but senior officials say that Pakistan has already agreed in principle to the idea.

The United States started a small training program for Pakistan’s paramilitary Frontier Corps in October, though officials in February also confirmed a “secret task force” of over 70 military advisers were also dispatched to provide direct training and advisory functions.

Historically, growing US training commitments have been a prelude to more direct US military intervention. The US military was involved in training the South Vietnamese army in 1954, an escalating commitment in which the United States ultimately committed more than 500,000 ground troops to a bloody and ultimately failed war.

What the president’s somewhat ominous comments about wanting to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty will ultimately come to remains to be seen, but recent history certainly is not on the side of the United States in creating a “stable” nation where none exists.

Related Stories