On the other hand there is Pakistan

.
.
.
.
Pakistan to put it charitably and hopefully is where China was in the 19th century, with decadent monarchical rulers who were out of touch with the people, and corrupt elites who collaborated with the Western powers in undermining their own countries, and working against the interests of the majority of the people.

The main problem is the Punjab Pakistan military. There needs to be a peoples revolution, and there after the Punjab Pakistan military needs to be fully dismantled ........ALL of it.

What Pakistan needs a Mao Zedong without the International Jewish links, but wait we have Imran Khan the main opposition leader and his ex-Jewish wife Jemima Goldsmith, who is related to the elite of Jewish society, the Rothschilds through former Lord Goldsmith. So Imran Khan has two Rothschild related Jewish sons, under Jewish law (Two future David Headley's......as with Prince William and Prince Harry).

Ah well. These Jews control all sides. They are persistent.

Pakistan thanks to its open cooperation with the USA, will be broken up into smaller countries with the help of the Pakistan Punjab military.

The Street Sweepers in Boys Lane, and Greasy Lane know this FACT, but not our Punjabi Pakistan military "Strategic Depth" geniuses. Probably the gora sahib ana confuses their thinking.

No other military in the world guarantees millionaire status if you become a general, accept in the Pakistan military. This automatic pay rise is not related to performance for the Punjab Pakistan military, or the country.

_________________________

KAYANI'S BROTHER; PAKISTAN'S BREAKUP by aangirfan

General Kayani (third from the left)

In November 2011, Pakistan announced that NATO supply routes into Afghanistan were to be (temporarily) shut down.

Anonymous left the following comment on our post "THE PAKISTAN WAR":

1. General Kayani's brother is the biggest contractor for these NATO supplies.

So this shutting down is only a way for Kayani to ask for a bigger piece of the pie.

Any doubts about that should be removed after seeing this story:

Army has its eye on Nato supplies deal

(Of course this story does not tell the whole story and tries to give the impression that the Army -actually generals - were not benefiting from it so far which is complete b.s.)

Of course the army has issued a denial that is hilarious claiming the "army has no role whatsoever in Nato supplies...

The National Logistic Cell (NLC) is a government controlled 'Crisis Management Organisation'".

Now that is hilarious and a blatant LIE.

Of course NLC used to be run by the army till some Generals decided to put it in their pocket.

They are also behind ISAF/NATO container theft that the Supreme Court is looking into.



2. Let's also not forget that the supplies were never fully stopped and that too was a PR stunt so their "reopening" announcement was another lie by both the civilian government and the army.

(Their excuse for reopening it is BEYOND hilarious; they said they were opening them "on humanitarian basis").

3. That the Pakistani army is an arm of the US/CIA, of that there is no doubt.

They have already alienated the biggest province Balochistan with over 60 years of atrocities and today they are doing the same in the North Western province (recently renamed 'Khyber-Pakhtoonkhwa') by carrying out murder and mayhem there under the guise of the War on Terror.

Yes, Pakistan's breakup is in full swing and the guys implementing it are the army and the current civilian leadership.

Rehman Malik (THE USA's point man in Pakistan....he formulates the real policies of the PPP government, over and above those that the Pakistan Punjab military does not control)

4. A point about Rehman Malik: Remember this guys last job was to safeguard just one person, i.e. Benazir Bhutto.

Well, you know how effective he was there.

And it is a fact that when she was attacked, Rehman Malik RAN AWAY.

So how was he punished?

He was made the Interior Minister, responsible for the security of 190 million people.

His promotion from senior civil servant who was sacked, into Interior Minister was was a direct demand of the U.S. That the USA brought PPP Zardari into power too is a commonly accepted fact in Pakistan.

This does not make sense.

.
.
.
.
I am not saying its not true, but it doesn't make sense.

Granted the JEWSA likes to create Grand Coalitions going back to WWII, against potential adversary's, but.

The JEWSA has Afghanistan with its huge border with Iran, from where drones have been launched and sabotage missions.

The JEWSA has Turkmenistan, which is on very friendly terms with the JEWSA.

Israel has very good relationships with Azerbaijan, from where terrorists have infiltrated Tehran, with the knowledge of the government in Baku.

The JEWSA and Israel have Turkey, which has previously based Israeli jets in the country, and is a NATO member, and is very close to the JEWSA.

With all these on the ground capabilities, why would the JEWSA allegedly open up secret bases in Baluchistan now?

From a Pakistani perspective, such bases would obviously be a threat to the national security of the country given the trajectory of Pakistan/JEWSA relations in the short, medium long term.

No can do would be the best answer.

__________________________

US presses Pakistan to allow intelligence bases near Iran

Satellite photo of Iran-Pakistan border

An Indian newspaper says the United States is putting pressure on Pakistan to allow Washington to establish espionage bases in the country’s Balochistan province to gather intelligence on Iran.

According to a report published by The Times of India on Monday, the US Congress has been discussing a resolution to recognize the right of Baloch people to self-determination as a means of putting pressure on Islamabad to give in to the US demands.

The move elicited angry reactions from Pakistan’s top leaders including Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani who described it as an attack on the country's sovereignty.

Pakistan’s foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, also said though the resolution was an isolated move by a few individuals, it "is contrary to the principles of the UN Charter and international law.”

“The outburst in America for Balochistan…is part of the move [by the US] to set up intelligence bases close to the Iranian border,” an unnamed Pakistani official was quoted by the paper as saying.

The official indicated that the Congressional hearing and resolution were nothing but "pressure tactics."

"They [Americans] want to use our soil against Iran, which we can never allow," he added.

Meanwhile, two officials from Pakistan’s security agencies and one from diplomatic circles confirmed to the daily that the American diplomats and military leaders had requested permission for their agents to operate near the Iranian border in Balochistan.

The revelation came a few days after the US House of Representatives blamed Pakistani security agencies for the abductions and extra-judicial killings in Balochistan.

This is not the first time that the United States has made efforts to spy on Iran.

On May 30, 2011, the members of a CIA espionage and sabotage network were arrested by the Iranian Intelligence Ministry.

On November 24, Iran announced the arrest of a dozen other CIA spies, who were found to have been on a mission to sabotage the country's nuclear facilities and other important compounds.

Another CIA espionage network with 12 members was busted in Iran and Lebanon in cooperation with the Lebanese resistance movement of Hezbollah.

On December 4, Iranian Army's electronic warfare unit downed a US RQ-170 Sentinel stealth aircraft when flying over the northeastern Iran city of Kashmar, some 225 kilometers (140 miles) away from the Afghan border.

Two US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that the drone had been part of a CIA reconnaissance mission, involving the United State's intelligence community stationed in Afghanistan.

Sheer spite and total aimlessness.

.
.
.
.
I suppose the JEWSA government has some logic why dirt poor fourth world people must be sacrificed to protect America's interests in Afghanistan.

The better view is that drone attacks by the JEWSA into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with the aid of the Punjab Pakistan military leads to more recruits and support for the Taliban FROM Pakistan.

For the mafia narco-peddler criminals within the JEWSA, including members of Obama's administration (Operation Fast and Furious) in a twisted way this is good, because then they have an excuse to stay and fight the noble fight for the JEWSA and the world, when the dirt poor farmer picks up the pitch fork and fights back against such injustice (metaphorically: AK-47, RPG's since the ISI has withheld supplying more sophisticated equipment such as lt SAM's.....for 10 years)

Other than the criminals, nobody else gains from drones being used in Pakistan from Afghanistan against innocent people.

To be sure the criminal is twitchy angry, bad tempered, arrogant, racist and psychopathic (has anyone ever met a happy, jolly, courteous, balanced psychopath?).......as he harvests Opium in Afghanistan and ships it to his own country for financial gain. But the best endevours and devious explanations of such criminal scum working with the Punjab Pakistan military must be thwarted through greater public discourse by all humanitarians.

_________________________

Obama Terror Drones: CIA Tactics in Pakistan Include Targeting Rescuers and Funerals

by Chris Woods and Christina Lamb Courtesy of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. and the Sunday Times, and antiwar.com

The CIA’s drone campaign in Pakistan has killed dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or were attending funerals, an investigation by the Bureau for the Sunday Times has revealed.

The findings are published just days after President Obama claimed that the drone campaign in Pakistan was a ‘targeted, focused effort’ that ‘has not caused a huge number of civilian casualties.’

Speaking publicly for the first time on the controversial CIA drone strikes, Obama claimed last week they are used strictly to target terrorists, rejecting what he called ‘this perception we’re just sending in a whole bunch of strikes willy-nilly’.

‘Drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties’, he told a questioner at an on-line forum. ‘This is a targeted, focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists trying to go in and harm Americans’.

But research by the Bureau has found that since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children. A three month investigation including eye witness reports has found evidence that at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims. More than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners. The tactics have been condemned by leading legal experts.

Although the drone attacks were started under the Bush administration in 2004, they have been stepped up enormously under Obama.

There have been 260 attacks by unmanned Predators or Reapers in Pakistan by Obama’s administration – averaging one every four days. Because the attacks are carried out by the CIA, no information is given on the numbers killed.

Administration officials insist that these covert attacks are legal. John Brennan, the president’s top counterterrorism adviser, argues that the US has the right to unilaterally strike terrorists anywhere in the world, not just what he called ‘hot battlefields’.

‘Because we are engaged in an armed conflict with al- Qaeda, the United States takes the legal position that, in accordance with international law, we have the authority to take action against al-Qaeda and its associated forces,’ he told a conference at Harvard Law School last year. ‘The United States does not view our authority to use military force against al-Qaeda as being restricted solely to”hot” battlefields like Afghanistan.’

State-sanctioned extra-judicial executions
But some international law specialists fiercely disagree, arguing that the strikes amount to little more than state-sanctioned extra-judicial executions and questioning how the US government would react if another state such as China or Russia started taking such action against those they declare as enemies.

Related article: A question of legality

The first confirmed attack on rescuers took place in North Waziristan on May 16 2009. According to Mushtaq Yusufzai, a local journalist, Taliban militants had gathered in the village of Khaisor. After praying at the local mosque, they were preparing to cross the nearby border into Afghanistan to launch an attack on US forces. But the US struck first.

A CIA drone fired its missiles into the Taliban group, killing at least a dozen people. Villagers joined surviving Taliban as they tried to retrieve the dead and injured.

But as rescuers clambered through the demolished house the drones struck again. Two missiles slammed into the rubble, killing many more. At least 29 people died in total.

‘We lost very trained and sincere friends‘, a local Taliban commander told The News, a Pakistani newspaper. ‘Some of them were very senior Taliban commanders and had taken part in successful actions in Afghanistan. Bodies of most of them were beyond recognition.’

Related article: Witnesses speak out

For the Americans the attack was a success. A surprise tactic had resulted in the deaths of many Taliban. But locals say that six ordinary villagers also died that day, identified by Bureau field researchers as Sabir, Ikram, Mohib, Zahid, Mashal and Syed Noor (most people in the area use only one name).

Yusufzai, who reported on the attack, says those killed in the follow-up strike ‘were trying to pull out the bodies, to help clear the rubble, and take people to hospital.’ The impact of drone attacks on rescuers has been to scare people off, he says: ‘They’ve learnt that something will happen. No one wants to go close to these damaged building anymore.’

The legal view

Naz Modirzadeh, Associate Director of the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR) at Harvard University, said killing people at a rescue site may have no legal justification.

‘Not to mince words here, if it is not in a situation of armed conflict, unless it falls into the very narrow area of imminent threat then it is an extra-judicial execution’, she said. ‘We don’t even need to get to the nuance of who’s who, and are people there for rescue or not. Because each death is illegal. Each death is a murder in that case.’

The Khaisoor incident was not a one-off. Between May 2009 and June 2011, at least fifteen attacks on rescuers were reported by credible news media, including the New York Times, CNN, Associated Press, ABC News and Al Jazeera.

It is notoriously difficult for the media to operate safely in Pakistan’s tribal areas. Both militants and the military routinely threaten journalists. Yet for three months a team of local researchers has been seeking independent confirmation of these strikes.

Eyewiness accounts

The researchers have found credible, independently sourced evidence of civilians killed in ten of the reported attacks on rescuers. In five other reported attacks, the researchers found no evidence of any rescuers – civilians or otherwise – killed.

The researchers were told by villagers that strikes on rescuers began as early as March 2008, although no media carried reports at the time. The Bureau is seeking testimony relating to nine additional incidents.

Often when the US attacks militants in Pakistan, the Taliban seals off the site and retrieves the dead. But an examination of thousands of credible reports relating to CIA drone strikes also shows frequent references to civilian rescuers. Mosques often exhort villagers to come forward and help, for example – particularly following attacks that mistakenly kill civilians.

Other tactics are also raising concerns. On June 23 2009 the CIA killed Khwaz Wali Mehsud, a mid-ranking Pakistan Taliban commander. They planned to use his body as bait to hook a larger fish – Baitullah Mehsud, then the notorious leader of the Pakistan Taliban.

‘A plan was quickly hatched to strike Baitullah Mehsud when he attended the man’s funeral,’ according to Washington Post national security correspondent Joby Warrick, in his recent book The Triple Agent. ‘True, the commander… happened to be very much alive as the plan took shape. But he would not be for long.’

The CIA duly killed Khwaz Wali Mehsud in a drone strike that killed at least five others. Speaking with the Bureau, Pulitzer Prize-winner Warrick confirmed what his US intelligence sources had told him: ‘The initial target was no doubt a target anyway, as it was described to me, as someone that they were interested in. And as they were planning this attack, a possible windfall from that is that it would shake Mehsud himself out of his hiding place.’

Up to 5,000 people attended Khwaz Wali Mehsud’s funeral that afternoon, including not only Taliban fighters but many civilians. US drones struck again, killing up to 83 people. As many as 45 were civilians, among them reportedly ten children and four tribal leaders. Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud escaped unharmed, dying six weeks later along with his wife in a fresh CIA attack.

Clive Stafford-Smith, the lawyer who heads the Anglo-US legal charity Reprieve, believes that such strikes ‘are like attacking the Red Cross on the battlefield. It’s not legitimate to attack anyone who is not a combatant.’

Christof Heyns, a South African law professor who is United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extra- judicial Executions, agrees. ‘Allegations of repeat strikes coming back after half an hour when medical personnel are on the ground are very worrying’, he said. ‘To target civilians would be crimes of war.’ Heyns is calling for an investigation into the Bureau’s findings.

One of the most devastating attacks took place on March 17 last year, the day after Pakistan had released American CIA contractor Raymond Davis, jailed for shooting dead two men in Lahore. Davis had been held for two months and was released after the payment of blood money said to be around $2.3m.

A case of retaliation?

The Agency was said to be furious at the affair. The following day when a massive drone strike killed up to 42 people gathered at a meeting in North Waziristan, Pakistani officials believed it to be retaliation.

The commander of Pakistan forces in the area at the time was Brigadier Abdullah Dogar. He admits that in drone attacks in general ‘people invariably get reported as innocent bystanders’. But in that case he has no doubt. ‘I was sitting there where our friends say they were targeting terrorists and I know they were innocent people’, he said.

Related article: Get the Data: Obama’s terror drones

The mountains in the area contain chromite mines and the ownership was disputed between two tribes, so a Jirga or tribal meeting had been called to resolve the issue.

‘We in the Pakistan military knew about the meeting’, he said, ‘we’d got the request ten days earlier.’

‘It was held in broad daylight, people were sitting out in Nomada bus depot when the missile strikes came. Maybe there were one or two Taliban at that Jirga – they have their people attending – but does that justify a drone strike which kills 42 mostly innocent people?’

‘Drones may make tactical gains but I don’t see how there’s any strategic advantage’, he added. ‘When innocent people die, then you’re creating a whole lot more people with an issue.’

Growing tensions

Drone attacks have long been a source of tension between the US and Pakistan despite the fact that the Pakistan government gave tacit agreement, even allowing them to fly from Shamsi airbase in the western province of Baluchistan, while publicly denouncing the attacks.

In return the US made sure that some of the terrorists killed were those targeting Pakistan.

However the relationship has been stretched to breaking point, first with the raid to kill Osama bin Laden in May and subsequent US accusations of Pakistani complicity, then the NATO bombing of a Pakistani post in November, killing 24 soldiers. In December Pakistan ordered the CIA to vacate the Shamsi base. For a while drone attacks stopped but they resumed two weeks ago.

The US claims the drones are a vital tool that have helped them almost wipe out the leadership of al Qaeda in Pakistan. But others point out they have stoked enormous anti-American sentiment in a country with an arsenal of 200 nuclear weapons.

Peter Singer, director of the 21^st Century Initiative at the Brookings Institution, points out the operation has never been debated in Congress which has to approve sending US forces to war.

So dramatic is the switch to unmanned war that he says the US now has 7,000 drones operating and 12,000 more on the ground, while not a single new manned combat aircraft is under research or development at any western aerospace company.

After a remarkable lack of debate, there is starting to be unease in the US at the lack of transparency and accountability in the use of drones particularly as the campaign has expanded to hit targets in Libya, Yemen and Somalia and until recently to patrol the skies in Iraq.

Three US citizens were killed by missiles fired from drones in Yemen last September. Anwar al Awlaqi, an alleged al Qaeda operative, was deliberately targeted in what some have described as the US government’s first ever execution of one of its own citizens without trial. His colleague and fellow citizen Samir Khan also died in the attack. Two weeks later Awlaqi’s 16 year old son Abdulrahman died in a strike on alleged al Qaeda militants.

Such unmanned war is a politician’s dream, avoiding the inconvenience of sending someone’s son or daughter, mother or father, into harm’s way.

The fact that the operations are carried out by the CIA rather than the US military enables the administration to evade questions. The Agency press office responds to media inquiries on the subject with no comment and refusal to give names of those killed or who are on the target list.

Until Obama’s comments last week, the White House would not even confirm the programme existed.

‘We don’t discuss classified programs or comment on alleged strikes’, said a senior administration official in response to the findings presented by the Sunday Times.

Lawsuit

The ACLU filed a lawsuit last week demanding the Obama administration release legal and intelligence records on the killing of the three US citizens in in Yemen.

Privately some senior US military officers say they are extremely uncomfortable at the way the administration is carrying out these operations using the CIA which is not covered by laws of war or the Geneva Convention.

The use of drones outside a declared war zone is seen by many legal experts as setting a dangerous precedent. Aside from allies such as Israel, Britain and France, other countries have drone technology including China, Russia and Pakistan. Iran recently captured a downed US drone.

Heyns, the UN rapporteur, said an international legal framework is urgently needed to govern their use.

‘Our concern is how far does it go – will the whole world be a theatre of war?’ he asked. ‘Drones in principle allow collateral damage to be minimised but because they can be used without danger to a country’s own troops they tend to be used more widely. One doesn’t want to use the term ticking bomb but it’s extremely seductive.’

Courtesy of the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Additional reporting by Rahimullah Yusufzai in Peshawar, Pakistan. Christina Lamb is the Washington Bureau Chief of the Sunday Times.

The hypocracy of the Pakistan government.

.
.
.
.
Drone attacks in FATA are carried out in cooperation with the Pakistan Punjab military. The USA cannot carry out drone strikes unless the Pakistan Punjab military cooperatives by providing coordinates and ground support.

The PPP government know this fact, and Zardari is said to be in favor of these attacks privately.

The only people that are against these attacks are the majority of the Pakistani people, the Insaf Party and the PML (N) party.

Zardari came to power, after the ISI murdered his wife in December 2007, probably for the USA. It was a classic ISI execution (ditto Laikat Ali Khan)....filled with symbolism for masterji.

The USA likes Zardari because he is a super-crook, as is Karzai in Afghanistan running a defacto narco state. The USA, and especially the State Department and CIA feel they can get greater "leverage" in a country, using super-crooks, who can even sell their mothers for a price. We must not be fooled by the often urbane, plummy accented, slithering creatures who work in such organizations. Zardari has about $4 billion stashed away in Jew bank Swiss accounts, and Zardari wants to stay in power for ever with USA backing ("memogate").

But 90% of Pakistanis loathe him OBVIOUSLY. How do you fine dress and present shit? Zardari is therefore out of sight, and his Zamindar deputy speaks for him in the MSM.

Naturally patriotic Pakistanis who aren't into "strategic depth" are against drone strikes, but as yet this national popular sentiment has not been seriously channeled to remove the puppet government in Islamabad, which thereafter results in a people responsive policy over American drones and much else.

For the country to be successful, Pakistanis must step forward and fight for the country, and not as Punjabis, Pashtuns, Baluchis Sindhis or Moharjis.....but as Pakistanis. This requires considerable courage.

_______________________________

Pakistan Condemns Drone Strikes as “Unlawful”

Renewed scrutiny has been placed on the drone war in Pakistan since Obama publicly admitted to it for the first time

by John Glaser, at antiwar.com

Islamabad issued another condemnation on Monday of Washington’s drone war in northwest Pakistan, branding it “unlawful, counterproductive and unacceptable,” after President Obama for the first time publicly acknowledged the classified program.

Pakistani Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said: “Our position on drone strikes is clear and based on principle. We cannot condone the violation of our sovereignty.”

Obama acknowledged the extrajudicial execution campaign in an interview that streamed live on YouTube. “I want to make sure people understand actually drones have not caused a huge number of civilian casualties,” he said. “For the most part, they’ve been very precise, precision strikes against against al-Qaeda and their affiliates.”

But investigative reports tell a very different story, namely that a large portion of the thousands of people killed in drone strikes since 2004 have been civilians. Furthermore, those militants that have been killed are mostly low-level insurgent operatives that are only known as such because the government (USA/Pakistani) said so.

(The Pakistan Punjab military under MOSSAD Busharaf handed over wholly innocent people mostly....700 for Guantanamo from 2001, vast majority have since been released by the USA. If the USA is well aware that Pakistani ground information about "terrorists" is suspect...why then does the USA launch highly inaccurate drone attacks which cause so much collateral damage....and ensure more recruits for the Taliban?)

Pakistani officials have been known to assist the CIA in carrying out drone strikes in the past, so Islamabad’s condemnation cannot be considered totally genuine. But the Pakistani people have been outraged by such constant attacks and have protested in the hundreds of thousands.

Well curtail the Military budget...in that case, just as the USA does.

.
.
.
.
Drone strikes have continued in recent days, with the full cooperation of the Coolie Gunga Din military in Pak-i-stan. They kill innocent civilians, Pakistani nationals, 99% of the time, women, children and old people.

For the Punjabi run Pakistani military losing a few ethnic Pashtun lives is worth the cost of receiving massive military aid from the JEWSA. Drone strikes also enhance the image that there really are "terrorists" in FATA which the USA needs to fight as does the Punjab military, in service of the USA. The Pakistan military after all is useful to the gora sahib, even though the Pakistani State does not need the company of gora sahib.

For the JEWSA there are a variety of conflicting hidden reasons why drones must be used to kill innocent civilians:

(i) It is a psychological message of racial technical superiority against the Iranic/Aryan Pashtuns.For some "insecure" Americans, surrounded as it is by their excessive wealth and power, this seems to be an important point to get across against fourth world Afghans.......and others (The Iranians in Mexico maid servant wank.)

(ii) It is a psychological message of racial technical superiority against the Pakistani military/The Pakistani state, and as an avenue of exerting further future American power against the Pakistani State. Though naturally the coolies haven't caught on to this yet, after several years. Such abstract thoughts are difficult to grasp against the few $'s the JEWSA throws at the Pakistani generals.

(iii) The use of Drones deflect from the REAL PENTAGON BUSINESS in Afghanistan, namely the Afghan heroin which is harvested under the aegis of the occupation forces, especially the British and the USA forces and then exported to Iran, South Asia, Central Asia, Ukraine, Russia, Europe and North America. The Taliban thus are "Controlled Opposition" fighting a fake Punch and Judy show, run by the Pakistani military/ISI for the USA. The nominal poorly performing Taliban are like the drones, a distraction and justification for why the JEWSA must fight the noble fight for 10 years and many more. The Taliban have lost 30,000 dead against the occupation forces mere loss of about 2800. The Taliban are poorly led, trained and armed with AK-47's and RPG's against the most sophisticated military machine in the world. Behind them the ISI paid for by the USA, and in front of the USA/NATO.

(iv) Afghanistan also serves as a base of mischief against Iran and Central Asia (Heroin, and later "al-CIA-duh")

A few wise nations have cotton on to his worthless, criminal, occupation which serves the peccadilloes and interests of some fat ugly Americans linked to Wall Street, and "The City"......an empire in decline after all has many incoherent, aimless, useless, unsustainable, untenable policies which in the long term are harmful to the country itself (Afghan heroin into the USA transported in using Military C-130 planes)........maybe this was the case with France, Netherlands, Poland and Canada.

Of course the Pentagon strangely have announced that they are going to spend huge amounts of money, and power-points to persuade the rest of the band of brothers to stay.....for they like working in coalitions of the willing......since this declining empire cannot sustain huge military losses of 10,000---20,000--30,000 or more unlike WWII...........and the "Controlled Opposition" Taliban are no Nazis.

For the civilian government in Pakistan the upping of the "security state" related to GWoT and the conflict in Afghanistan is bad for them, as it highlights and brings to the fore the importance and role of the Pakistan military.

This is neither what Pakistan the failed state needs or wants.

The duty of ANY civilian Pakistan government, regardless of political background would be to de-escalate GWoT, and the role of the Pakistan military in the American narrative of GWOT, and conflict in Afghanistan.

(i) With Afghanistan, maintain steadfast the blockade. Check ALL exports to Afghanistan which might have a security baring......through ALL the border crossing points, not just Khyber and Bolan Passes.

(ii) Build on the removal of the last defense minister from the military, by cutting the budget of the Pakistani military, and its enormous bloated size of 800,000 military and 300,000 paramilitary. Whats the point of having such an enormous military of 1,100,000 men unofficially IF ALL IT DOES IS SUPPORT USA GEO-STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES IN SOUTH ASIA? WHICH IS PATENTLY AND OBVIOUSLY HARMFUL TO PAKISTAN'S EXISTENCE. Lets not feed the beast.

The Pakistani tax payer must not support such policies a day more, so that the Pakistani military can kill more civilians.

(iii) The Punjabi military have shown that whilst they can get upset for a short while against gora masterji, against JEWSA criminal arrogance in the Punjab in the form of the Raymond Davis case and the attack on the military post recently........they are perfectly happy to cooperate with the JEWSA to kill fellow Pakistanis in the NWFP and even Baluchistan. The Pakistani military touts itself as egalitarian, classless and professional........but what is supremely professional about killing Pashtun civilians in secret covert agreement with gora sahib in a fake GWoT game designed by the JEWSA?....................surely ANY civilian government, even pretending to serve the WHOLE country would know this fact?

Strategic shift in Pakistan

.
.
.
.
Always good to see state policy being discussed by properly qualified people with the right credentials on a consensus basis, rather than by a cabal of closed shop generals in a Corps commanders meet.

We can look at the problem of Pakistan--USA "misunderstanding" from what happened in late November 2011.

Or from the problems that arose subsequently from the relationship set in late 2001/2002, by Mossad Busharaf.

Or from the late 1970's when the Pakistan military chose extremist Jihadi groups with the most colorful OTT leaders as the main tool for promoting complicated and delicate Pakistani state policy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India......with the active backing and funding of the USA. Seriously speaking what was one expecting to achieve with psycho Hekmatyar who switched between the KGB/CIA/ISI or a one eyed religious teacher of very little stature. To be sure they fitted the Third World requirements of the USA, but certainly not Afghanistan or Pakistan.

Or from 1954, when Pakistan accepted a $1 billion aid package, largely military orientated, and entered into a deep close relationship with the USA......without thinking of the long term consequences of such a relationship.

The USA is a hyper-power run by Jews.

The proposals provided below are HALF-MEASURES and pretty GENERAL, lacking in detail in terms of implementation and outcome objectives.

Moving away from the USA is not an easy matter.

Any move in that direction necessarily means greater reliance and closer relationships with India, and of course China. This so called conference of experts, from what I have read has not addressed this counter-balance measure.

________________________

Pakistan to Rethink Cooperation With US

A convening of Pakistani diplomats and foreign envoys made recommendations for changing policy to be less subservient to US

by John Glaser, antiwar.com

Pakistan will renegotiate a set of agreements with the United States that go back to 2002, as part of a wider shift in policy resulting from the unprovoked U.S. attack in November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

The arrangements being reconsidered by the Pakistani government include two key policies: allowing the transit of supplies through Pakistan to U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan and providing logistics support for occupying forces in Afghanistan and U.S. counterterrorism efforts in the region.

The U.S. attack on a Pakistani outpost in November has prompted a rethink of a number of Pakistan policies. The U.S. has already been evicted from the Shamsi airbase in Pakistan, from which it launched drone strikes, and supply routes have already been suspended.

This latest decision to reconfigure those arrangements was the result of a two-day conference attended by Pakistani officials and envoys from around the world with the explicit purpose of evaluating Pakistani cooperation with the U.S. in light of the November attack and a generally poor relationship.

The recommendations coming from the conference include:

(i) amended arrangements for supply routes and logistics support,

(ii) minimizing the presence of the CIA in Pakistan,

(iii) and pursuing efforts to stabilize Afghanistan irrespective of Washington’s approach.

The envoys also recommended Pakistan work to repatriate the over 3.5 million Afghan refugees still living in Pakistan.

Other notable conclusions coming from the conference were an effort to seek a formal apology from the U.S. for the November attack on Pakistani soldiers, firm guarantees that Pakistani sovereignty will be respected in the future. So far, the Obama administration has refused to formally apologize and has done everything to ensure further disintegration of the U.S.-Pakistani relationship.

Pakistan

.
.
.
.

America’s Dumb-Assed Duplicity In Af/Pak

Comment by Peter Chamberlain in his blog.

Whenever America's two-faced foreign policy stands exposed to the world, the military's first response is always to send forth a highly decorated spokesman, to feign hurt feelings that people would ever doubt American military integrity. The backtracking usually comes later, when war crimes and duplicity stand fully exposed, revealing American CIA or military covert actions which are indistinguishable from other terrorism.

The direct action missions and irregular warfare actions simulate terrorism, which means that innocent people must die in the process. To pretend otherwise is asking that we ignore reality itself. The attack upon the Pakistani border post was clearly one of those "tickling" incidents mentioned by former CIA director Michael Hayden, intended to reveal what Pakistani reactions would be to small air attacks, as a prelude to bigger incursions inside Pakistan. Our relationship with Pakistan has degenerated into an ongoing psywar against each other.

How can the US really try to undermine Pakistan's "clout" in Afghanistan if their help is needed to bring order to Afghanistan? Generals tend to be braggarts, who often express their disgust with the rest of the male population for perceived weaknesses. Listening to them is like watching the scene from Patton where he slaps the shell-shocked soldier for cowardice. US military spokesmen will have a much more difficult job convincing the world that our intentions are above-board and sincere in the future. The deceptions upon which this war has operated are being revealed one by one. Each revelation undercuts American claims of integrity and denials of evil intentions. Until the Beast stands fully exposed to the world he will continue to hide behind the Hollywood "good guy" image that the Pentagon has carefully crafted over the years.

_______________________

US needs to tackle Pakistan’s clout in Afghanistan, says Dempsey

Anwar Iqbal and therearenosunglasses.com

The US military chief has said there still are sanctuaries for militants in Pakistan and that the country’s influence in Afghanistan needs to be tackled.

“In Pakistan, the sanctuary for these militants persists. We have to work hard to end its influence on our Afghan mission,” Gen Martin Dempsey said on Friday.

The chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff also said that Pakistan’s decision to block Nato supply routes reflected badly on its relationship with the United States.

The US military chief indicated that the US was already working on alternative routes to reduce its dependence on Pakistan for supplying its troops in Afghanistan. “We can change the percentages of our reliance upon the Pakistani line of communication.

“We can adjust and we can get it done. It will be more expensive. It will be time-consuming but we have the time to do it,” he said.

“The real problem for me is not the cost. What is troubling me is that they would close the route. What it says about the (US-Pakistan) relationship is troubling for us.”

The general insisted that those who were burning Nato fuel trucks in Pakistan were doing little harm to the US. “When they torch fuel, it is not our fuel they are torching. We do not pay for fuel until it gets to us.”

Gen Dempsey claimed the US military had achieved its “intended purpose” in Afghanistan by reversing the Taliban momentum. He noted that a recent loya jirga in Afghanistan had emphasised the need for establishing a long-term relationship with the United States “in a very encouraging way”.

Gen Dempsey insisted that the Nato attack on two Pakistani border posts was not deliberate. “We did not do it intentionally, regrettably the Pakistani military believes that we did,” he said when asked what caused the attack.

“It is incomprehensible to me, based on our relationship, that they believe so, but they do.”

In an earlier statement, he had said the US-Pakistan ties were troubled, but repairable. His latest remarks at Washington’s Atlantic Council, however, reflected a growing disenchantment with an ally that once played a key role in implementing America’s cold war strategy for Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s military said the Nov 26 attack was unprovoked but the US and Afghan officials have claimed that Nato troops were responding to fire from the Pakistani side of the border.

Expressing his exasperation with the Pakistani perception, Gen Dempsey asked: “What in the world we will hope to gain from it? We did not do it intentionally.”

The US military chief said he had spoken to Chief of Army Staff Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who was his classmate at a military college in the United States, about the incident and was now waiting for the investigation to conclude. He has also held similar discussions with Nato commanders in Afghanistan, he added.

“We have chosen patience and we are asking them (the Pakistanis) to show some patience too.”

Asked why the Pakistanis were claiming that the attack on their military posts was intentional, Gen Dempsey said: “We are kind of the victims of our own success sometimes. The rest of the world sees (us) as all-knowing, all-seeing and completely precise”.

But this was not always true as “the warfare is not just ugly. It is messy. It is chaotic and it is unpredictable. We are waiting for the investigation to tell us what really happened.”

The killings have served to upend Washington’s attempts to improve ties with Islamabad, which worsened after the secret US raid into Abbottabad to kill Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in May. The Nov 26 incident also threatened to undermine US efforts to stabilise the region before a planned troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2014.

If you are pulling up the draw bridge, and cutting ties with the USA whether strategically on even symbolically, yes it might be wise to see where th

.
.
.
.
CIA is at in the country, FIRST and or running parallel with cutting ties with the JEWSA.

Start with the MILITARY, OBVIOUSLY given that its the most powerful institution in the country and one that matters..........THE official cooperation, and the unofficial cooperation, involving the relevant personnel in service. Which retired officers are working for the CIA?

The main political Parties.....PPP, PML (N), PML (Q) and especially the Jihadi parties such as JI.

Pakistani Civil Service including and especially the police (IB).

Which elite groups from the 500 Zamindar and Tamindars, and the 30 business families work for the CIA.

Which journalists and media organizations work for the CIA? We know the CIA likes to invest in propaganda as a psych-war mechanism, and avenue for promoting and facilitating its policies through soft power.......power of persuasion.

Which civil society people work for the CIA?

THEN THE GORA.

Obviously the CIA works with a coalition of the willing........so people from other Western countries in Europe and the world generally come into play (Germany, Australia, New Zealand..........)

A CIA agent is not merely an American citizen with a CIA badge....and credentials.

They could be tourists, they could be business people, journalists, foreign government officials......or a gora who speaks perfect Urdu with a Pakistani wife and children(great cover).

We speak as a lay person with some understanding of the subject over two decades.

The CIA operates as a servant of Israel, and therefore logically given the secret and overt agenda of Israel in the Greater Middle East, Pakistan should clearly distance itself with the CIA. Obviously need to look at the size of the American embassy, which is located next to the Presidential palace.

If you have a commission which legitimates the myth that Bin Laden was living in Pakistan for 10 uninterrupted years after 2001, as the most wanted man in the world, under the noses of the Americans and Pakistani military/security complex in a garrison town for at least 5 years, and had not died in 2001....then its going to be a white wash or "gora-wash."

If the commission is going to re-state the lie that 80 gora cammando's in half a dozen helicopters entered deep into Pakistan uninterrupted, fought for 40 minutes in a garrison town without ANY hindrance from the Pakistani security....and then flew back to Afghanistan, then its going to be a white-wash.

As my secondary politics teacher use to say along with Jim Hacker, ALL commissions are ultimately white-washes that don't really get at the truth, but are an elaborate exercise in calming public disquiet, and the need to be seen to be censoring the wrong doers in power, even if they don't ultimately (Pakistan military making up a cock and bull narrative using the SSG, trained and armed by the USA.......PPP government)
___________________________

Pakistani Commission to Probe CIA Presence in Country

'Abbottabad Commission' Vows to Release Results to Public

by Jason Ditz, antiwar.com

Speaking today at a press conference, Pakistani Justice Javed Iqbal, the head of the “Abbottabad Commission,” says that the commission is moving into probes of the extent of the presence of CIA spies across the country.

Of course it is no secret that the CIA has a massive presence in the country, but repeatedly incidents have come to light where CIA officials are caught acting outside of the official, Pakistani-sanctioned presence.

Iqbal went on to say that the commission, which was initially empaneled to investigate the assassination of Osama bin Laden, had been repeatedly threatened during the course of investigation.

The commission reportedly will also conclude that Osama bin Laden had absolutely no role in the operations of al-Qaeda at the time of his assassination. The documents recovered suggest that he might not have had any rule for over a year before his killing.

The Abbottabad Commission is expected to complete its work by the end of the month and has promised to release all of its findings publicly, a move which stands to create considerable controversy.

Stating the rather obvious, but initial stages of realigning with 90% of Pakistanis.........not so hard to do, not so bad.

.
.
.
.

I suppose one of the main lessons learnt from this attack, on the Pakistani military top brass theoretically, is that its better to align yourself with your own people, who make up the rank and file of the military, and the tax payers money which funds the vast $40 billion military empire in the country............rather than the whimsy of the day support of the JEWSA since 1954, and pathetic consequent pleading for "understanding" between "Friends not Masters". Lets not even talk about patriotism, Izzat, duty and God.

Lets focus on "NEEDS" instead......the essential interests and needs of the Pakistani military against the theoretical benefits of USA support.

To be sure a sly well oiled USA official might be able to spin a plausible story about why Pakistan must align itself to the USA, and why it must follow USA directives, but 57 years of close security experience since 1954, and 10 years of GWoT should tell us otherwise.

The USA is a dangerous unpredictable power for Pakistan.

Its a dangerous unpredictable power run by Jews, and secret Jews (Hilary Clinton, Obama.....). Its a complicated country with many different elite groups all vying to promote their particular world views. For a weak vulnerable Third World country to enter into into a security pact with such a country involving issues of war, security, terrorism and military action is extremely foolish......extremely foolish.

The attack on the two Pakistani military posts by elements of the USA military was utterly futile from an American strategic perspective. Pakistan WAS important to the USA military, given the number of visits to the country by Admiral Mullen:

Pakistan since 1954 has aligned itself with the USA.

Pakistan has extensive military training programs with the USA.

Pakistan's military hardware has extensive amounts of USA equipment.

Pakistan played a key role in the Jihadi narrative created in the Greater Middle East for the JEWSA from the late 1970's, and the "al-Qaeda" myth and the Taliban freak show from 1994, run as "Controlled Opposition" by the Pakistani military, at the insistence of the JEWSA and the CIA.

Pakistan fundamentally sustains the JEWSA occupation of Afghanistan.

Pakistani military leaders speak the language and jargon of the CIA (in English in Pakistan where most people don't even speak or understand the language---95%), in addition to carrying out live military operations against their own created monsters, and alleged monsters in the NWFP perpetually since 2004 on the insistence of the JEWSA. Where 4--4500 Pakistani soldiers have died, 18,000 wounded and 10,000 have deserted in the service of the JEWSA......partially armed and funded by the JEWSA since 2004.

Pakistan has sacrificed $70 billion voluntary loss to the national exchequer, and 35,000 civilian deaths and 300 terrorist ops since 2001................led by the Western trained top military brass.

But such servile slavish sacrifice and service is not necessarily appreciated by all the competing groups in the JEWSA:

(i) They may have other agenda's which are mostly for Israel.....led by Israel, whose agents and secret Jews control Capital Hill.

(ii) We must not under-estimate the stupidity of Americans or any other Western people. We must not equate greater wealth with greater wisdom, even though its a commonly held belief. All too often especially in Western security, many people who work in such organizations from the military onwards are by nature right-wing "little Englanders" who may not understand or want to understand and accommodate the complexities of the world.

Thus for such narrow minded people, the Pakistan military, rather than being the useful, servile, slave which has sacrificed so much for the JEWSA, is seen as an enemy which is playing double games against them, and which must be attacked openly and publicly to show who is more powerful.

If such people .........dominate JEWSA action for Israel then Pakistan must clearly and quickly cut ALL ties with the JEWSA, and re-align the nation under CHINA, which is an Asian power and a neighbor which has been good for Pakistan consistently since 1963.

The choices here are not that challenging or difficult.

_________________________

Top Pakistani General: US Attack Was ‘Pre-Planned’

Bunkers Were 'Specifically Targeted'

by Jason Ditz, antiwar.com

Speaking today to a Senate defense committee Pakistan’s Major General Ashfaq Nadeem, the Director General of Military Operations, said he had concluded that the US attack on a pair of Pakistani military bases was not only deliberate but “pre-planned.”

The military bases, in Mohmand Agency, were totally leveled by the attack, and Maj. Gen. Nadeem says that NATO initially gave them incorrect information about the target of the attack.

“The bunkers were specifically targeted and destroyed,” he reported. He said that the attack was carried out by US Special Forces operating outside of NATO’s operational control, and that he had no doubt the attack helicopters and warplanes knew what was being targeted.

Several officials in the military told the committee that they don’t trust NATO’s probe, saying that repeated NATO probes over past incidents never yielded any meaningful results and that there was no reason to expect any transparency this time.

Brief review of the Kiyani PR directive again.

.
.
.
.

Pakistan military ordered to return fire if attacked by Nato forces

By the Guardian and therearenosunglasses.com and Saeed Shah.

Pakistan‘s military commanders have ordered their troops to return fire if they come under attack from Nato forces, raising the prospect of further deadly clashes along the country’s border with Afghanistan.

General Ashfaq Kayani, Pakistan’s army chief, gave the new order in response to the recent deaths of 24 soldiers when their border posts came under fire from Nato helicopters.

Kayani is under immense pressure from within his own ranks over the two-hour bombardment by the helicopters of an ally (????? Pakistan military post), to which the Pakistani air force did not respond (ordered to stand down more likely, as the airbases are too busy monitoring Pashtun villages for gora sahib).

The incident piled further humiliation on a military still stung by the US special forces operation in May that killed Osama bin Laden deep inside Pakistan.(and not carried out by the SSG on the orders of Kiyani for Obama's re-election)

“I want to emphasize and leave no ambiguity in the rules of engagement for everyone down the chain of command,” Kayani said in a letter to his troops.

“When under attack, you have full liberty of action to respond with all capabilities at your disposal. This will require no clearance at any level.

“I have very clearly directed that any act of aggression will be responded to with full force, regardless of the cost and consequences.”

The communique, issued in Urdu, will be read out by local commanders to their soldiers.

Kayani also said that the air force did not respond to the Nato attack “due to breakdown of communication with the affected posts”.

(utter water buffalo bullshit.......it doesn't take two hours)

The move effectively transforms the role of more than 100,000 Pakistan troops deployed along its western border from counterinsurgency to border protection duty.

(better double that to 200,000 soldiers armed with 40mm AA guns and lt SAM's in each of the 821 border posts)

The Nato attack happened on the border between the Afghan province of Kunar and the Mohmand part of Pakistan’s tribal area. The border posts were 300 metres inside Pakistani territory.

Pakistan claims the attack was “unprovoked” and continued even after it alerted Nato to the fact that its post was coming under fire.

US officials have claimed a combined Afghan and US special forces squad operating close to the border came under fire from suspected militants on the Pakistani side, and that they responded by calling in air support.

But a senior Pakistani military officer said US officials supplied the wrong co-ordinates for the proposed strike, and then launched the attack “without getting clearance from the Pakistani side”.

“It was an unprovoked and indiscriminate attack by US helicopters and fighter jets,” he said.

He denied an account by American officials, carried in Friday’s Wall Street Journal, that they had checked the location with Pakistan first and the fatal strike had been given the go-ahead.

An investigation by the US military is under way.

In retaliation for the incident, Pakistan has blocked the transit of Nato supplies through its territory, ended the US use of an airbase and is boycotting next week’s high-level international meeting on Afghanistan in Bonn.

Pakistan’s co-operation is considered vital to stabilizing Afghanistan and pushing the Taliban into peace talks.

Meaningless PR exercise

.
.
.
.
Over 80 Pakistani border troops have died in engagements with Western occupation forces across the border in Afghanistan, mostly involving fire fights.

The above figure does not include soldiers who have died from USA backed proxy wars in Pakistan....FATA/NWFP/Baluchistan.

The idea that the 821 border posts on the Af/Pak border no longer require permission from GHQ to open fire and defend themselves is ridiculous. This is pure PR bluster.

The two posts that were attacked last Saturday did fire back without permission from GHQ within the course of the developing battle. They were doing their duty....what failed them was GHQ Pindi.........who could have:

1. Called in the airforce into the vicinity of the battle to warn the aggressors. Not necessarily engage them. Within 10 minutes.

2. And/or sent in additional forces to help the men fighting there.

3. And/or tell the men at the 2 posts not to engage (fighting for 2 hours according to Pak GHQ Pindi), but retreat in different directions.

It is well known that the Pakistani military is the worst in the world, and which holds the dubious record of killing more of its own unarmed innocent people than any other military on earth (surpassing the Indonesian military and the Khmer Rouge)..........when it comes to knee jerk reactions against India, and its own people it never hesitates to use the worst form of brutality in its arsenal.

BUT when it comes to gora sahib, the colonial Raj era Pakistan military is confused, angry and undecided...giving out meaningless empty PR orders to cool the righteous public in Pakistan.

BUT MERE PR GESTURES WON'T DO AT THIS JUNCTURE........THE PAK MILITARY MUST CHOOSE EITHER THE PAKISTANI STATE OR GORA SAHIB:

Previous advice over many years still stands:

Permanent blockade of ALL supplies to occupation forces in Afghanistan.......source of the REAL mischief.

Close ALL USA military bases in Pakistan.

Eject ALL USA military personnel from Pakistan.

Cut ALL military training programs with Western countries especially the USA/UK.

Cut all military aid programs with the USA.

Close ALL USA consulates in Pakistan and reduce the USA embassy staff to about 10 people.

Close ALL foreign NGO's in Pakistan since most are intelligence fronts.

Reduce Western tourism in Pakistan.

Close ALL Western missionary organizations in Pakistan since ALL are intelligence fronts.

ALLOW CHINESE MILITARY BASES IN PAKISTAN, NOT JUST GWADAR

IT IS VERY DIFFICULT to believe the Pakistan military. If the Pakistan military can allow America to use its airbases, and military facilities to kill Pakistani civilians with drones......then is it not also possible that GHQ Pindi can help gora sahib to kill a few of its own men in the army? To please gora sahib, and ensure the continued flow of military USA aid which everybody knows profits the worthless generals only.

Didn't Mossad Busharaf sacrifice 4,000 soldiers, and national shame in losing to India again at Kargil 1999 by launching an adhoc poorly planned attack, just so that he could undermine PM Sharif and prevent a peace process with India, which would have brought enormous prestige to Sharifs government?

In that engagement THAT LASTED 2 WHOLE MONTHS the Indians used their airforce, but Pakistan did not.

In that engagement the Indians poured in 30,000 troops, whilst Pakistan's force was the same size throughout, beginning to end with no reinforcements......5,000.

In that engagement the Indians brought in 300 artillery pieces that fired 250,000 shells...whilst Pakistan's artillery force in the scene was just 40.

The Pakistan military exists to serve itself.

The Pakistan military exists to serve gora sahib.

The Pakistan military fuck things up.....thats all they are good for.

Gora sahib has no respect for the Pak military, naturally.

________________________________

Pakistan Orders Troops to Return Fire if NATO Attacks Again

Denies NATO Claims that Pakistani Officials Endorsed Attack on Military Bases

by Jason Ditz, antiwar.com

Pakistan’s military commander, General Parvez Kayani, has issued a new order on the rules of engagement along the Afghanistan border, saying that the troops should return fire if NATO forces attack their positions.

The move comes just a week after US warplanes and attack helicopters crossed the border into the Mohmand Agency, attacking a pair of military bases and killing at least 24 Pakistani soldiers. The attack has sparked massive anti-US protests across the nation.

Pakistan’s Army also said that if the Air Force had been scrambled during the attack they would’ve fought with the US warplanes. They insisted it was “no fault” of the Air Force that they weren’t prepared in time to contest the bombings, which lasted for nearly two hours.

But exactly what happened? The story keeps changing. Officials have gone from saying it was an accident, to briefly claiming that they came under attack by Taliban, to insisting that they would “wait until the inquiry” to issue comments. Today, officials claimed that Pakistan had actually signed off on the attack, and that border control officials even gave them the coordinates of the bases to attack them.

Not true, insists Pakistan, who says that on the contrary the US gave them coordinates for what they planned to attack, and that it wasn’t where they actually attacked, a pair of bases on top of a mountain. Pakistan also rejected NATO claims that the bases were “temporary camps” and not well known, and they have noted in the past that the bases were made of concrete and had been there for years.

Before the public sympathy barometer swings too much in favor of the Pakistan military

.
.
.
.
Pakistan can initiate wars against India, and special ops....as it can against Afghanistan, Iran and China.......terrorist operations that is.

Against the USA it is a different matter as the USA is the best friend of the Pakistan military.

Many top brass of the Pakistan military have been trained there and the UK.

So the two hour inaction by GHQ Pindi on the border region saga where Pakistani soldiers were being killed and the national defenses tested, with continued pleading by GHQ not to attack is a symptom of this flawed one-sided relationship.

It is neither incompetence or mis-communication which explains the 2 hour inaction.

Other sources in Pakistan, not controlled by the military say the fighting went on for 4-5 hours....enough time to get near by units to the scene, in addition to airbourne units such as the SSG in Abbottabad, Cherat, Attock, Tarbela.......in fact not too far away from the scene of action .

But possibly it would seem the Pak military didn't want a real fire fight with additional units arriving at the scene with an escalating scenario, and instead may settle for ......???????

1. Permanent blockade of supplies to USA occupation forces in Afghanistan

2. Drastic reduction of America's presence in Pakistan.

3. A sharp swing towards China with the formal awarding of military bases in Gwadar, and FATA.

This would be wiser and logical, but sad that such tragedies jolt the top brass of the Pak military into action, rather than make such decision years ahead strategically.

_________________________

Pakistan defends lack of action during Nato attack

By Dawn and AP and therearenosunglasses.com

Confusion and a communication breakdown prevented Pakistan’s airforce from scrambling to defend troops on the ground during the deadly Nato bombing last weekend of two border outposts, the military said Friday, responding to rare domestic criticism of the powerful institution.

The Pakistani military, which eats up most of the country’s budget and is accountable to no one, has said the attack that killed 24 troops was an ”act of deliberate aggression” that went on for close two hours.

It has also said that Pakistani commanders contacted and pleaded with coalition commanders to stop firing.

Nato and US officials have disputed that account, which has triggered uncomfortable questions in this South Asian country over why Pakistan’s own fighter jets and helicopters stationed close to the border did not take off to defend the ground troops during the attack.

The military has said troops did fire back at the Nato choppers when they attacked.

A Pakistani military statement on Friday said the response could have been more ”effective” if the airforce had been called in, but this was not possible because of a ”breakdown of communication” and confusion at ”various levels” within the organisation.

The incident has pushed already strained ties between Washington and Islamabad over the future of Afghanistan close to rupture.

Islamabad has closed its eastern border to Nato supplies traveling into landlocked Afghanistan and said it is reviewing its cooperation with Washington.

US officials expressed their condolences over the loss of life and denied the Pakistan army was deliberately targeted.

But they have not apologized, saying it would not be appropriate before an investigation into the incident has been completed. In the past, Nato and the US has complained that militants along the border are helped or tolerated by Pakistani soldiers.

US officials have said a joint US-Afghan patrol came under fire from the Pakistani side of the border and called in airstrikes.

On Friday, the Wall Street Journal quoted American officials as saying that Pakistani officers had given the go-ahead for the raid, unaware they had troops in the area.

Pakistan’s military also faced criticism after the May 2 unilateral American helicopter-borne raid that killed Osama bin Laden, with questions – yet unanswered – over how the aircraft were able to fly deep into Pakistani territory without the knowledge of the airforce.