An urgent de-construction of the "al-Qaeda" myth.

.
.
.
.


.


In an interview in late 2007, a month before her death Benazir Bhutto stated that Osama Bin Laden was dead, and that he had been killed by an unofficial ISI operative Omer Shaikh in late 2001. He was killed it is alleged so that he could no longer continue giving his alternative opinion of what happen in NY 9/11, which was that he as "al-Qaeda" did not do it, but rather it was the work of state entities within America with Israel. In his last interview to a Pakistani newspaper this is what he asserted.

Osama Bin Laden then disappeared for two years, and appeared again in late 2003 in videos, where he makes various ideological statements mainly against America and the West, in studio presentations. Some argue that these video presentations are fake, manufactured by elements of the West who wish to justify the continued Afghan war, and the GWOT in general, by implying that there is a global terror organization called "al-Qaeda", and that its leader is still directing his organization against America, Israel, the West and anybody else they don't happen to like at any particular time.

The CIA disbanded its unit looking for Osama Bin Laden in 2005.

Some argue that there is no such organization as "al-Qaeda", but that it is merely an intelligence front of Israel mainly and its false flag ops in the Greater Middle East, Europe and America...which are deemed necessary to further Israel's geo-strategic interests.

From my meager analysis, the Pakistani ISI/Military have played a major role in creating the "al-Qaeda" myth. Their deep involvement in "Operation Cyclone" where they trained 85,000 Afghan Mujaheddin, and 12,000 foreign Jehadis from the 1980's with the Americans, MOSSAD and the British, means that the Pakistani ISI/military first and foremost had to have developed a close relationship with "al-Qaeda" with its strength of 5,000 fighters as alleged by America or its real size of just a few dozen Arab friends of Osama Bin laden, who were his business and ideological partners, and who for his Western intelligence masters coordinated the foreign Arab fighters in Afghanistan through the ISI (AT best a liaison officer who also chipped in with funds).

The Pakistani military must have maintained liaison officers with Osama Bin Laden right into 2001, until his death, and they must know where he is.

In a wider sense in relation to the article below, it is good that Zardari has stated that Osama has passed away, and it would be good if ALL in Pakistan, political parties of all shades say the same too, including the Pakistan military.

There is absolutely no sense in creating a legend around Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan now. Especially where illiterate misguided people in the Frontier province lionize him, and place unwarranted faith in the man and his false messages of hope and salvation.......let us all in Pakistan from civilian politicians to the military in unison say that the man has passed away and this is the shared consensus of all in Pakistan.

As to his organization "al-Qaeda" again it should be stated by ALL in the top echelon that at a practical level that so called organization has no presence in Pakistan, save a few hundred foreign jehadi fighters rum left over from the 1980's hailing from various Arab countries, Chechnya, Uzbekistan and Chinese Sinkiang province.

How foolish it would be for the sake of milking a few more $ in the few $ billions, and few more $ worth of military aid, that the Pakistani military should continue to support the myth of "al-Qaeda' and in the process invite a devastating attack against Pakistan in the future from the neo-colonial forces of the USA, UK and Israel ALL of whom have stated that Pakistan is the most dangerous country in the world, and 'al-Qaeda' is based there, and its leader Osama Bin Laden is based there near the Hindu Kush. An attack against Pakistan that could result in damages worth 100's of billions of $.....and the loss of millions of lives.

Where is the rationality here in pursuit of solid national security? Does Pakistan require the permission of anybody to say such things? Zardari does not.


__________________________________________________


Zardari says Osama is dead: Pak media

By NDTV.


According to the reports emerging out of Pakistan are pointing towards the fact that one of the world's most wanted terrorists Osama bin Laden is dead.

Pakistani news channels are quoting President Asif Ali Zardari as saying that Osama is dead.

Zardari has said that Pakistani intelligence believes Osama is dead as there's no evidence to say that he is alive.

He has also ruled out the possibility of Pakistan's nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the Taliban or other radical Islamic groups, saying that the arsenal had been put under "extra security".

"Pakistan's nuclear installations are in safe hands and under extra security," Zardari said in an interview to foreign media.

The concerns over the safety of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal came about after Taliban's recent advance towards the federal capital, which sparked off fears in the US and other countries.

"I want to assure the world that the nuclear capability of Pakistan is under safe hands," he said.

Allaying fears about a possible threat to the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, Zardari said the country had a strong command and control system for its arsenal that was fully in place.

US Secretary State Hillary Clinton has said one of the prime American concerns, which have been raised with Islamabad and Pakistan's military, is the probabilities of Taliban advancing and wresting "keys to the nuclear arsenal of Pakistan".

Perspective of a young journalist.

This is an article written by a Pakistani journalist who also works for the government run PTV. He has good contacts in the ISI, and generally his articles put the blame of Pakistan's problems usually on everybody else except the Pakistanis themselves, and especially avoids criticism of the all powerful military/ISI....and hence the reason why he is a journalist and also a TV presenter in the country. He purports to have Arab ancestry.

_______________________________________________

"America's War, Not Ours"

By Ahmed Quraishi

(The war in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia, with looming open war against Pakistan under President Barack Obama in 2009, and GWOT in general is not so much an American war, but a Jewish war, to give Israel supremacy in the Greater Middle East...........So Pakistan is an "ally" of America in a Jewish war against Islam. That's why Mr. Quraishi the wars raging currently are in 3 Muslim countries, and why the others threatened with war are Muslim: Pakistan, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, in the Greater Middle East in general, to facilitate Eretz Israel.

The main facilitators/enablers of this policy within Pakistan have been the Pakistan military/ISI. Why? How does this benefit Pakistan? How does siding with this Jewish supremacist policy improve Pakistan's security? Well Mr. Quraishi since you have greater channels to this sorry bunch, you had better ask them.)

02/10/09 "ICH" -- A little noticed but major flaw in the Pakistan-US partnership in the war on terror is leading Pakistani policymakers and public opinion to make a serious error in judgment that could devastate Pakistan's stability and leave us looking like another close U.S. ally: Iraq.

(There is no Pakistan-USA partnership, more of a master servant relationship. Simple recent example is the way the ISI chiefs were reorientated at the behest of the USA. Acha Sahib! What ever you say saar!

And there you go again, like the true Jew propaganda mouthpiece you talk about GWOT, like so many other mainstream government journalists in Pakistan.........you of all people should know that al-Qaeda is a fake front of Western and Israeli intelligence, an open secret amongst people who write about such things.

The Taliban were created in 1994 at the insistence of the USA (Jewish dominated Clinton administration) via the Pakistan military/ISI and Benazir Bhen. You see Mr. Quraishi, once we have the courage to say clearly and loudly, that the whole premise of GWOT is fake without any ambiguity and that it is a vehicle to further Israel's geo-strategy through America, then we can begin to question the overall American led strategy to fight "al-Qaeda" and the Taliban for the next 100 years, and the Jew desire to take the fake GWOT war into Pakistan on false pretenses, and secure the Pak nukes for Israel.

If you continue supporting the fake GWOT argument as a Pakistani journalist then it is harder for you to oppose American policy against Pakistan in general.

As to Iraq being an ally of the USA? When? The 1958 military coup replaced the British puppet monarchy, and the military men were not that well disposed to the USA. Since the 1960's you have the Ba'athists in power.......a secular Socialists party, which looked more to the Soviet Union then the USA. There are rumors that Saddam was an American spy, who was maneuvered into power by them......but officially Iraq was pro-Soviet Union. The vast majority of Iraq's arms until 2003 were from the Soviet Union, very little from the USA....in fact nothing. If you want to find out with which country a Third World country has good relations just look at their arms inventory.

From the mid-1980's America started developing a relationship with Iraq, with the Americans providing satellite images of Iranian troop movements, but still no arms transfers. So from 1980-1990 Iraq was not an ally of the USA, but there was some "cooperation". From 1991-2003 the USA was openly hostile imposing sanctions against Iraq, and starving 1 million Iraqis to death. Since 2003 Iraq has been occupied by the USA, and 1.2 million Iraqis have died and 4 million are now refugees. The Iraqis have no choice but to accept this American occupation of their country, invaded under false pretenses........but Iraq most certainly is not an "ally" of the USA.

Iraq can never be an ally of the USA, because of the problems related to the Jewish psyche based on "historical vengeance"......The enslavement of the Israelite's into Babylon and the perennial narrative of suffering associated with that country into Jewish self image and history.

The 3,000 year old Talmudic North African Jewish "religion" is a strange and evil "religion" that has vengeance at the center of it; historical vengeance that is reflective............think of the great Jewish holidays like Purim, a holiday that celebrates the mass genocide of other non-Jewish people, including women and children, through Jewish schemes. Judaism is the only "religion" in the world which has vengeance, and genocide at the center of it's teachings; think about that. When you understand this "religion" then you will understand real Israeli policy, and which in turn will help you explain the intricacies of American foreign policy and why Mesopotamia, Assyria, Babylon Iraq can never be an ally of Jewish controlled USA.

The Likes of you, and Ahmed Rashid and all the rest are purveyors of Jewish propaganda, and it is not that difficult to see why)

This error in judgment is simple but easily overlooked: Pakistan did not take part in occupying Afghanistan (in November 2001, good to see that you are referring to the situation as it really is, an occupation which is proving to be very harmful for the Afghan people; a failed narco state tacitly run with glee by the USA).

( Pakistan did not participate in the occupation of Afghanistan, but was never the less a role player in providing sanctuary to the remnants of the Taliban, and its leaders since 2001...Mulla Omar et al. Pakistan has been a "role player" in Afghanistan since the 1970's at the behest of the Americans, arming the Mujaheddin and then later the Taliban. Whilst Pakistan's role has been considerably reduced since 2001, Pakistan being a neighbor of Afghanistan, and the enabler of the Taliban and al-Qaeda myth can't "opt-out" just like that, as an intricate narrative which has been created by the Jew to ensnare Pakistan in the Afghanistan quagmire......or did the Pakistan generals think the Americans Jews were supporting Pakistan's adventurous policies into Afghanistan to make Pakistan bigger and stronger and give the country strategic depth?

For Pakistan to opt-out of the Afghanistan quagmire and create a clear demarcation line between the two states, the Pakistan military and political elite have to create an alternative narrative to GWOT, and start seriously debunking the mythical al-Qaeda organization.......otherwise you can't separate yourself off from the false GWOT narrative which says Pakistan is some how intricately involved:

Tell the world OBL died a long time ago....then it exposes the fake OBL videos since 2002.

Tell the world that al-Qaeda does not exist, its a fake front organisation and the justification of Western and Israeli intelligence ops.

Lets call the terrorists in FATA and the NWFP in general by what they really are; American backed terrorists out to destabilize Pakistan.

Close the American military bases.

Send the foreign security people in Pakistan back to their countries.

Stop taking American military aid, up to $1.2 billion a year fighting the terrorists. Deal with them using Pakistan's own resources.)


The war to sustain that occupation and prolong it is not Pakistan's war. It never was.

( But it has become Pakistan's war because of Pakistan's association with America........why take $1.2 billion each year............what for? It certainly is not in Pakistan's interest to see the Coalition forces stay in that sorry country too long.....because then Afghanistan becomes a launching pad for attacking Pakistan in the future, and we are now seeing initial engagements through the:

1) TTP and others.

2) Drone attacks/over flight over Pakistani territory.

3.) Predator attacks.

4) Ground attacks.

5) False flag terrorist incidents inside Pakistan.

6) Destabilisation of Pakistani regime( Musharaf)

7) Destabilisation of the Pakistan economy.

8) Creating of a false narrative through the Jewish media which says that Pakistan is unstable, and harbors the mythical al-Qaeda, and arms the Taliban, and cannot be trusted to safeguard the Nuke bombs.

9) Creating a false narrative through the Jewish media that the Americans are seriously challenged in Afghanistan, and the loss of 100 servicemen this year is the end of the world for America and requires America to attack a sovereign neighboring country and "ally", and kill their civilians. That ALL the attacks inside Afghanistan originates from FATA alone.........American commanders in Afghanistan have stated to Congress that about 30-40% of attacks in Afghanistan come from the outside........so in reality poor FATA maybe responsible for only about 20% of the attacks against Coalition and Afghan government forces in Afghanistan.

10) The USA has been at war with Pakistan since 2007 at least, and the Jew is waiting for Obama, he with the Muslim middle name, to be elected as President. Then the Jew can say "our Shiddi president with the Muslim name, is not anti-Muslim, or anti-Brown people...we are doing this for the sake of the world"

After such incidents, if you still call the USA an 'ally' Mr. Quraishi as an 'informed journalist' who has a close ear to the government, then what you need is a good kick up the backside.

All these things are to test the Pakistan military, and the level of outrage and reaction of the military men in Pakistan............these are the classic signs and a precursors to a major future attack (In military parlance: probing attacks)..............Psychologically and practically are the Pakistan military ready for war against the USA?)


For President Zardari's government to 'own' this war at US behest is not only illogical but it also shifts the responsibility of stabilizing Afghanistan onto Pakistan's shoulders. In a worst case scenario, if anything goes wrong, this 'Pakistani ownership' can and will be used later to force a variety of foreign military interventions in Pakistan, as part of the war on terror or to protect our allegedly endangered nukes. This is why Islamabad needs to officially leave the coalition that occupies Afghanistan and squarely pin the responsibility for Afghanistan on the US.

(Yes, yes, exactly..........but do the military men have this foresight?)

This delineation is important because the Pakistani war is limited to our border regions and against criminal groups masquerading as the 'Pakistani Taliban'. It is not Pakistan's war or responsibility to stamp out the Afghan opposition and resistance groups that thrive inside Afghanistan and may sometimes enter Pakistani territory to seek support from tribes with whom they share ethnicity. It is not our responsibility that Washington and its puppet Karzai regime have failed or are unwilling to bring the disgruntled Afghans on board and end the civil war.

( Quite right, it is not Pakistan's responsibility. The fact that Afghanistan is a failed narco-state, where the vast majority of Afghans are unhappy with the foreign occupiers is not Pakistan's responsibility........the fact that perhaps 100 American servicemen have died in Afghanistan this year is not Pakistan's responsibility)

The question of alleged support from Pakistan to the Afghan Taliban, the 'sanctuaries', and the 'rogue intelligence' theory is all secondary if Washington decides today to talk to Afghan opposition groups, including the Afghan Taliban, and offers them a share in ruling their country. If this happens, the question of Pakistani support for Afghan insurgency will become obsolete since there will be no insurgency to support. This is the crux: reconciliation in Afghanistan will end the Afghan opposition's need for sanctuaries anywhere. What is happening right now is that Mr Karzai and the former Northern Alliance are refusing to bring Afghan opposition on board and instead are pushing US to a war with Pakistan to settle old scores.

( No my friend, you misinform your readers, by giving Karzai too much credit. Karzai, the "mayor of Kabul" is a weak, corrupt ineffectual leader...read Bahlol Lodhi's articles posted on this blog..........Karzai actually cried when British officials talked to him about the situation in Afghanistan. That is why the Americans and British love him, and sustain him in power for so many years despite the appalling situation in Afghanistan............he is the last person on earth who could manipulate the Americans..........its the other way round. He is an ex-Unicol executive brought into power by the Americans, and guarded by the Americans as local Afghans can't be trusted.

From the American perspective there are no problems in Afghanistan; they are making huge profits from the narcotics trade a lot of which incidentally runs through Pakistan. What certain sections of the Coalition in Afghanistan want is greater incursions into Pakistan, to destabilize Pakistan and get at the Pak nukes...........and you can ask who is manipulating the Americans in Afghanistan on this policy. Note the difference between what the Pentagon and Mullen said on his visit to Pakistan, and the actions of the Coalition in Afghanistan against Pakistan....clearly there isn't a consensus. There is a major debate going on, and that is good, within the Pentagon and security establishment.

What Pakistan has to do is identify the Jews in the Coalition forces in Afghanistan, amongst many other things. The blurry confusing contradictory 'Alliance' between Pakistan and America cannot last and Pakistan would do well to end it quickly.)

Eliminating Afghan resistance could have become "Pakistan's war" if our American friends, after taking over Kabul, accommodated their Pakistani ally's legitimate interests in Afghanistan, understood Islamabad's valid strategic concerns, and rewarded it for taking a difficult decision: ditching an ally in Kabul in a country that remained hostile throughout the Cold War.

(America was never a friend of Pakistan. Pakistan is a brown people country, founded on the basis of Islam. Pakistan's military/ISI was used by America to create the al-Qaeda myth, Pakistan's military/ISI's role being indispensable in this, and the Taliban...the regional bogeyman whom the Americans must forever pursue into other countries....again created with the indispensable Pakistani military/ISI help. In that sense the Americans don't give a fuck what Pakistan needs or wants, at the present juncture. Pakistan served a purpose.....and in American parlance has been suckered.

Having said this the Americans I believe have written off $8 billion?????? of the Pakistani national debt, and have given Pakistan perhaps $12 billion since 2001.................that's a lot of compensation for 'losing' Afghanistan. Assuming Afghanistan was Pakistan's to own in the first place, using what, extremist medieval Taliban which even the Islamic Iranian regime called a bunch of dinosaurs.Did Pakistan actually think putting the Taliban into power in Afghanistan would be safe for Pakistan? That there might not be some blow back?

Pakistan and Afghanistan should have been one nation in the 1950's, and such moves were made by both Pakistanis and Afghans, in a federated arrangement with the Afghan king being king of all the parts. Negotiations broke down in the late 1950's and the two Pathans Ayub Khan and Ayhya Khan never pursued the matter...until it was re-ignited by the Americans of all people through the Mujaheddin in the late seventies, Islamic extremists, and a possible KGB agent Gulbuddin Hekmatyar...and later the Taliban.

Now federation between the two states will be difficult as the Jew with his grand designs has arrived in the locality, and Iran, India and Russia also have a say in what is going on here.

Afghanistan through Pakistan/USA/Israel has become "internationalised", which restricts obviously what Pakistan can do with Afghanistan in the future.

In my honest opinion the Pakistani state does not seem to have a cohesive long term strategic policy for the country.......it seems to be ad hoc)

What ultimately happened is that everyone in the region was allowed a bite of the Afghan pie except Pakistan. Almost all major players – US, NATO, Iran, India, and others – were allowed to secure their interests except Islamabad.

( Natural and logical outcome of 9/11 which the Jews carried out........now in Afghanistan they have a base with which to attack Pakistan, and secure the Pak nukes for Israel)

Pakistan could have swallowed this insult if Washington kept Afghanistan to itself, but the reality is that the Bush White House ceded crucial space in Afghanistan to India, while keeping Pakistan out.

( There we go again, into India bashing, typical ISI stale talking point narrative. India despite requests has not sent any troops into Afghanistan, and has been very constructive in rebuilding Afghanistan. India is still a bit player in Afghanistan compared to the actual role of the USA and UK..........but the effort to keep Pakistan out of Afghanistan is a calculated one of course by the Jews........The Pakistan military/ISI helped them get into Afghanistan, and now Pakistan is no longer needed.

The Jew game plan is to get the Pakistanis and Indians fighting each other, through the ISI and RAW, and false flag ops. Mr. Quraishi when you repeat these anti-India rants, when everybody in Pakistan should know that the biggest and only power acting aggressively against Pakistan is the USA, for Israel, then you too are contributing to the false Jewish narrative.)

Even mildly Pakistan-friendly Afghanistan elements were not accepted in the power structure in Kabul. And now Afghan soil is being used by third parties to export terrorism into Pakistan and destabilize the country. If this American lapse was unintentional, then it shows US ineptitude. But circumstantial evidence indicates that Pakistan was probably part of the expanded US agenda following 9/11, which included invading Iraq, toppling the regimes of Syria and Iran and redrawing the map of the wider Middle East, including Pakistan.

( That is the ultimate goal: Bush informed Blair about this in a secret discussion in January 2003, leaked memo by two brave conscientious British government officers, but the plan has been stalled due to the Iraqi resistence, and Hezbollah's performance in 2006.......the plan CLEARLY is still there, but with a delayed trajectory, and the Jews have not given up it seems, and the contradictory statements of what the American senior officials say and what the Americans do in Afghanistan against Pakistan is part of this broad narrative and struggle within America.

Incidentally do watch the Hollywood propaganda war movie, "Black Hawk Down" (2001)....see how the movie mentally and subliminally conditions Americans into fighting more wars for the vile filthy Jew in other peoples countries......and the Pakistanis are portrayed as unreliable "allies" in a coalition which incidently contained many many foreign forces. The Pakistanis who shed their blood for America in Somalia as peace keepers.

In the Jewish cryptic message scene which the ISI is involved and familiar with(Marriot Hotel), Somalia is Pakistan (ha! ha! ha!-------Indic 70%, Aryan 30%), destabilized and infiltrated by American backed Islamic fundamentalists like the TTP, a failed state............and Ethiopia is India, helping American geo-strategy, and if persuaded enough invading Pakistan (The nuclear Deal).....ha! ha! ha!(Indic 70%, Aryan 15%, other 15%)

2009......If Obama becomes President in America, and the BJP comes to power in India. Then a joint attack against Pakistan is forseeable. Occupation of Pakistan.......the 50 Pakistan nuke bombs cannot do anything against the Americans, as much as Saddam's WMD's in 1991 proved worthless against the American's. End of Pakistan. Foreign occupation.............The Jews want to use India against Pakistan also.

And if Pakistan is occupied you can be sure that there will be Iraqi style civil war to control, manage and divide the country by the occupiers, using the "El Salvador option".....in addition to securing the Pak nukes......and on the scale of Iraq, 15---20 million Pakistani refugees in India, with the women selling their "Pudee" for 1 rupees to local Indians. Iran, China and Afghanistan cannot manage significant influx's of Pakistani refugees after a civil war, so it will be India's privilege and duty.

That is why I have stated many many times Pakistan needs to sign an FTA with India asap, and legalize the LOC. Reorientate the Pakistan military away from India into defending the Western part of the country. It will look silly if American forces pour into Pakistan, whilst the Pakistan armed forces still have their bayonnets fixed against India.

After all it is about preserving and defending what Pakistan already has.

I have said these things for several years and it is for the Pakistanis to make their own judgments based on the what is going on in reality.

But dear brothers and sisters do consult and see what American occupation, with Israeli advisors, really means for most Iraqis....educate yourself.

And on the other hand one hopes the Aryans of India do not behave like Ethiopians.....and although the breakup of Pakistan may look good for India theoretically on paper and in meetings......its the consequences and the fine detail one has to think about after.

I am confident that wisdom will previal, and that South Asia will decisively and quickly unite economically and militarily to thwart outside schemes in the region, and avoid the situation of Iraq.......it has never been been tried before, and we should give it a chance NOW.......but not by 2020 friends, but now.

A fire in Pakistan is a uncontrollable fire in the "house of South Asia". South Asia is one entity)

Instead of taking on a nuclear Pakistan head on, we were effectively used to occupy Afghanistan and then gradually, starting 2004, the noose was tightened around us. It began with the nuclear proliferation issue and then moved on to a new threat, the safety of our nukes. Interestingly, the 'Pakistan-is-another-Iraq' theory and the nuclear scare were both exclusively started and hyped by the US media, with dramatic pressure-building tactics similar to what was done in the run up to Iraq invasion.

( The problems America faces in Afghanistan because of FATA is just that hype, Jewish media propaganda........the Americans have lost about 100 servicemen this year in Afghanistan.............not something to get over excited about, or as a justification to attack the soveriegn territory of an "ally' repeatedly and willfully killing their citizens......this is a great crime and terrorism against Pakistan by America for the Jews.)

For the growing chorus in the liberal sections of the Pakistani media that wants to 'own' this war, we must understand this: the occupation of Afghanistan and the elimination of Afghan resistance groups is not Pakistan's war. Our war is limited to the insurgencies raging from Gwadar to the Chinese border with partial malicious support from the Afghan soil. This war can be won. Making Pakistan 'own' America's war in Afghanistan and shifting to it to our tribal belt will exacerbate the insurgencies and could destabilize Pakistan beyond the point of return.

(Yes........a lot of the media in Pakistan is foreign controlled and they parrot the lines of their foreign masters without questioning the official American narrative about what is really going on in Afghanistan and Pakistan)

Are Coalition Forces Really under pressure----the FACTS.

Several senior officials in America say that the 70,000-80,000 Coalition forces that are based in Afghanistan are under severe threats of attacks based in the FATA region of Pakistan...............is this true? Do the actual FACTS in Afghanistan match the rhetoric from the USA?

The hysteria being fomented in the MSM and alternative press that the situation in Afghanistan is getting dire, because of the activities of the Taliban against the Afghan government. Even the NIE has joined in the chorus to say the situation in Afghanistan for the Coalition forces are getting desperate. Such reports in the media of course invite some kind of response to do something against this alleged rising tide of violence against the Coalition. That usually means a call to, and pressure to, on the USA administration:

1) Increase the troop levels in Afghanistan....thus more coalition forces and the doubling of the Afghan army from the present 70,000 to 135,000.

2) Physically intervene in Pakistani soil, in hot pursuit of the Taliban, and to put greater pressure of the Pakistani government to breaking point; to the point where the 'relationship' is severely strained.

But the facts tell us a different story. The Afghan Taliban is about 8,000 strong, but nobody is sure of its actual size. Against them are arrayed a large mixed bag of forces consisting of coalition forces from the West 70,000--80,000 and the Afghan security forces and militia of about 230,000 and increasing daily.

That is a ratio of 1:37 between the Afghan Taliban and the Afghan government security forces, warlord militia's loyal to the government and the coalition forces.

Now it could be that the Afghan Taliban are another version of Hezbollah, or the 300 Spartans, or the Mermedons of Greek Fable. But the FACTS say that every encounter between the Afghan Taliban and government security forces has ended in a turkey shoot against the Afghan Taliban......these are the FACTS...

The casualty rate of Coalition forces over 7 years is about 800 soldiers killed, or about 115 a year if evened out over 7 years of occupation. Check it yourself. When you consider that the American armed forces lose several thousand soldiers during peace time each year, and no hysteria there by the government officials........then why this hysteria NOW in relation to the minuscule loses in Afghanistan relative to Iraq and over all peacetime loses? " The attacks from FATA pose a grave threat...the end of the world is neigh blah blah blah......" "We must intervene in another sovereign country"

The Soviets didn't pursue the Mujaheddin into Pakistan, where they were openly being trained by the Pakistanis, Israelis and others. The Soviets lost or missing in action of about 20,000, or 2,500 troops a year. The British army didn't hot pursue the IRA into Ireland even though over 3,000 British lives were lost....................Prominent British figures, including a Prime Minister was targeted.

So why this unique American International law exceptionalism in relation to FATA?

1. Political and media pressure....to do something......to help McCain maybe?

2. To slowly get at the Pakistani nuke bombs......seems the most plausible answer.

3. The Taliban is a rag tag ineffective militia created by America through the good offices of their servant service the ISI from 1994.........it is a controlled opposition operation, and not a real resistance movement.

4. The only people suffering in Afghanistan are the ordinary Afghan people from Coalition violence, and gross mismanagement from a central corrupt government, run by Drug related criminals..........the alleged increase in violence against Coalition forces is total Bullshit. More rectum talk. That is why you have 250,000 Coalition and mercenary forces in Iraq with casualty rates of 4,200 killed over 5 years, and 70,000-80,000 Coalition forces in Afghanistan with casualty rate of 800 so far over 7 years.

Simple....FACTS.

One hopes the good Afghan people find their 'liberation' from this coalition force occupation soon, they have experienced much sorrow over 30 years approaching due to the activities of foreign forces, but it will never come through the fake ISI/American inspired Afghan Taliban.

Empire of Zion through America and NATO

This is excellent article by a true scholar, but because he is working in America he is polite enough not to get into the basics of the real reasons why America is there, which is NATO with the urgings of America is in Afghanistan to:

1) Protect and propagate the illicit drugs trade for the Jews, which since the invasion by the USA in 2001 and the ousting of the Taliban has soared by 2,000 % in production from 2001 (not an endorsement of the Taliban, created by the USA from 1994, with Gulf Arab money and the logistics of Pakistan security) Drug Warlords run Afghanistan, with American and NATO protection. Its a narco state of the worst kind over seen by America. The global narco trade is worth $600 billion + run by Jews, and orchestrated via London banks.

It is stated by some that the 10 year Vietnam war, which killed upwards of 70,000 Americans unofficially, and 3 million Vietnamese was also about the control of narcotics for the Jews, and London. This international trade which began in earnest in the eighteenth century, of production from British controlled Bengal India exported to China, was perceived to be threatened by Communist nationalists (a Taliban equivalent if you will).

Fighting and dying in Afghanistan for Opium

The Taliban and Zionists Opium..............................note that it is the Zionist Clinton administration which brought the Taliban into power via Benazir's Pakistan.

2) To create a Jewish world empire with America doing the grunt work and dying, with NATO in toe (see PNAC document 2000 penned by the Jews). There are 800 American military bases around the world, and soon America will be artificially collapsed through the Zionist agents in America to make the country more 'amenable' and 'attentive'------mass starvation, dislocation, chronic unemployment, police state and that old favorite, mass detentions.

3) Striking Iran from the bases in Afghanistan. I understand new bases are being built to expand this capability.

4) Striking Central Asia from their bases in Afghanistan.

5) Striking China who will challenge America in the future.

6) striking South Asia.

7) The transport of oil and gas via Afghanistan, for the benefit of oil corporations, who do not wish to use Iran.

Suffice to say the scholars article below whilst eloquently written, well researched and argued, is very weak and doesn't begin to get into the crux of the matter, and very much like Bahlol Lodhi sahib in earlier articles in the blog, misses the essential points and provides irrelevant tentative solutions at the end.

Of course each time we write articles we are not obliged to give serious solutions to a regional problem, but as he is a highly educated Pakistani, who is not connected to the sleaze of Pakistani politics, his 170 million nationals deserve more than the small superficial recommendations he provides at the very end.

I hope he does, together with other SECULAR scholars of Pakistan.

One final point Hussain sahib. You could have mentioned the role of transporting Islamic fundamentalists trained by the West and Israelis from Afghanistan/Pakistan to fight first of all in Bosnia from 1994, up to 7,000 and later in Kosovo, helped significantly with covert Iranian /American logistical backing. This would have been an obvious additional linkage between the developments in the Balkans in the 1990's and in Afghanistan/Pakistan with NATO in Afghanistan later, after 2001.

There is a hidden strategy by criminals involved in a big league heist, sumje?

So your logical rationalization of the reality by an educated SANE human being isn't going to wash with the bhen chauds.

The secular middle class in Pakistan need to see where all this heading, organize and get the Sardars and security establishment do what is in the best interests of Pakistan.

Whilst the Sardars and some generals (visited regularly by them) can run to London, the rest of the 170 million will have to stay put in Pakistan and actually defend the country.

You will note the threats the Jews have been making in America against Pakistan.

Has the possibility that Pakistan might be fighting the American's and NATO in the future, under President Obama sunk in. Has all precautions and preparations been made. If I were an American I obviously would want military and intelligence getting a feel of the area, as security advisor's.

It is at times like that you will wish as Pakistan that you had the backing of South Asia, not to over stress the point.

__________________________________

If I may suggest..................which is consistent with what I have been saying earlier.

The solution is quite simple for the people of Pakistan and Afghanistan but requires a requisite amount of courage.

The time to be defensive is over-----'Are you doing enough against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban?' Yes we are sahib, please sahib, we are! sahib we like you, we visit you every day in your place, and your television chat shows', please sahib we want your approval badly, really we do, because you are soooo wonderful, sahib please take down your trousers, I want to kiss your beautiful Jewish backside.............please sahib let me kiss this beautiful backside.............

The Pakistani leadership and nation together with patriotic Afghans have to get rid of these foreign forces out of Afghanistan pronto, without using the American created and inspired Taliban, as they are de-legitimating agents, rather like the mullahs of Iran.

The presence of American troops and NATO constitute a long term threat to Pakistan obviously. Its not there has a stabilizing force, but there as a base to launch future wars against others. Afghanistan is run as a criminal narco state with minimal reconstruction, so obviously the task of nation building is not their prime objective there, is it? Of course not.

Pakistan closes the foreign military bases on her soil asap, and the activities of foreign agents on Pakistani soil. Stops taking foreign especially military aid, and the activities of foreign agents forever over 1000 years looking for al-Qaeda, the creation of the West and Israel, if it ever existed.

Pakistan re-aligns with Asia, and especially South Asia in a very serious way in economic and security pacts (you have neighbors to help you if the Zionists attack Pakistan; China won't commit itself to Pakistan as they didn't in 1971 or 1999 Kargil)

This needs to be done Not in 2015 or 2020, but NOW.

You either have NATO troops in Pakistani soil in the near future or a South Asian security pact that has real power. Which is it going to be? Take a good look around the duniya, everybody is getting into security and other pacts with their neighbors.

The GULF Arabs managed by the UK/USA/Israel won't/can't come to Pakistan's rescue militarily, indeed its the other way around like a later day Raj army, Pakistan has stationed troops in their country; Iran won't; Zionist Turkey won't, but.......................................... South Asia can if Pakistan is serious....and acts accordingly. Rather than doing Chini bhai is my sure fire protector that I can rely on, and Pakistan is part of the Middle East, and the Arabs are my blood brothers.

Pakistan de-links itself from the USA/UK, but does not attempt to stand alone.

You make yourself viable and worth defending in the context of South Asia, and if I am not mistaken where Pakistan is located geographically.

Forever pursuing friends who come short on crucial moments is unproductive and not intelligent. It smacks of stupidity of the inferior idiot.

In the 1950's Pakistan was constantly destabilized, with change of governments every few months; Ayub was bought into power by them, and they destabilized and toppled him, resulting ultimately in the breakup of the country; then Bhutto's democratically elected government was ousted by them in 1977, and he was killed by them; then they killed Zia together with the entire top brass in 1988; then they ousted Bhutto in 1990 because she said the wrong thing about Saddam...............and I wonder if they had a role in Musharaf's coup in 1999. They certainly had a role in his down fall in 2007/8......presumably with certain objectives....so on......so on.

For some mysterious reason the relations between the Pakistanis and them go back to normal, as the picture below shows, as if the past events never existed. With the Pakistanis behaving like this, obviously this must invite more of the same from them.

If the Pakistanis don't learn from history, then we could be seeing American troops in Pakistan under President Obama, in Waziristan, and we can say goodbye to Pakistan. Remember the greatest American mischief against Pakistan occurred during the Democratic Party In America rule, 1965-68, 1977-79, 1993-2000.

Pakistan also needs to debunk the myth of al-Qaeda, using its considerable role and knowledge in that theater, and provide serious proof that OBL passed away in 2001----This is a good defense mechanism for Pakistan.

This needs to be done in light of the American threats from the Jews there. The Charmar Chamcha's will make light of this fact of course within Pakistan, but serious Pakistanis need to be a little bit more alerted to this fact. You simply can't shrug off threats by such people from such a country.

Baitullah Mehsud recently said Osama Bin Laden died in in 2001. OK this is a start. But he is not a credible character. So did Benazir in Novemebr 2007 on a television interview. Musharaf also indicated this in a vague way, but I think given the gravity of the topic he could have been more clear. We need generals from the ISI saying these things, and other senior officials. Writing articles and so forth.

If the al-Qaeda myth is debunked they can't prod you year after year chasing a non-existent organization, that is run covertly as a cover of black ops by the West, can they? Is most of the suicide bombing in Afghanistan and Pakistan al-Qaeda or them? Of course its them. At least the rest of the world can't blame you.

Why destroy the cohesion of the Pakistani security forces, and the stability and viability of the nation, by chasing foes real and imagined originally created by the West? Where is the logic?

If it is shown that the Taliban were created at the behest of an American Zionist agenda, then the rest of the world will understand why Pakistan is the last country which should be held to account for this organization.

After Taliban Mark I--Phase 1979-1993 guided by America/UK/Israel openly, Taliban Mark II was created, phase 1993-current, covert backing from Clinton's America, which then fought the I Taliban Mark I. Now the Americans are creating a military presence in Pakistan with Taliban Mark III (Frontier Corps), phase 2008---forever until the American's physically invade the region, after setting brother against brother, with Musharaf's approval? Which will fight Taliban Mark II.

This is ullooo bacha games! Chamar Chamcha's in the security aren't, or don't seem to be objecting to it, and seeing where all this is going for Pakistan.

The Bush administration have said that the next false flag, inside job, artificially manufactured terrorist attack in America will come from Pakistan. If Pakistanis are framed, as they seem to have been recently in the USA (the 11), and you have America with NATO invading Pakistan..............what contingency plans do have for this in Pakistan?

Surprise surprise and lo they make these absurd comments again on queue, just after Bush----HERE . These again should not be taken lightly if high ranking officials such as Mullen and Bush are stating such things. Co-operation with the American's will eventually lead to invasion of Pakistan, but non-cooperation may not if Pakistan does what the writer has suggested quickly.

What ARE the Chamar Chamcha going to do then in Pakistan if America invades, help them?

Is Chini bhai going to come to the rescue?

'al-Qaeda' and the Taliban have to be exposed as fake Western fronts as soon as possible. We know the 10,000 'Taliban' aren't a serious threat to them, but provide a good excuse for their military presence in Afghanistan, and their terrorist acts, including suicide bombs by 'al-Qaeda' in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which is an extension of the El- Salvador option, and This.

Musharaf, and the Mir Zafar Pakistani elite have yet again sold out Pakistan. They will be living comfortably in London Mansions or the UK/USA run Gulf states, as they watch the destruction of Pakistan. But it does not have to be this way..........

Mir Jafar and Clive----because of the betrayal of one man and his ambitions India paid a price. 30 million killed in manufactured famines. At least 1 million died fighting the evil empire, and eventual economic destruction of one of the richest countries on earth-----simply see how India was a few centuries ago, before the colonials arrived, depicted in movies, drama's, books, and pictures.

_________________

What is NATO Doing in Afghanistan?

By FAHEEM HUSSAIN

06/06/08 "Counterpunch" -- - What is NATO doing in Afghanistan? What are the true aims of NATO intervention in the region? These are the questions that I mean to address in this article. To understand what is happening in Afghanistan one has to go back to the attack on Yugoslavia by NATO forces in February 1999.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO lost its raison d'être given that Western Europe and the United States were no longer threatened by an invasion from Eastern Europe. NATO thus had the choice between disbanding itself or developing a new reason for its existence. This gave the opportunity to the United States to reshape NATO in ways that would serve its imperial interests. It is very important to remember that its founding documents clearly say that NATO was a defensive organisation, which would go into action only when one of its member states was attacked.

The first step in the US strategy of changing the nature of NATO was the attack on Yugoslavia on the pretext of preventing ethnic cleansing. Clearly Yugoslavia had not attacked a NATO member state thus excluding a response from NATO. Whatever one can say about Kosovo, it was internationally recognised as an integral part of Yugoslavia (and is still internationally recognised as part of Serbia) and Yugoslavia did not attack or even threaten a NATO member state.

As was clear right from the beginning of the Kosovo crisis in the 90s, and as was confirmed at the NATO 50th Anniversary Celebrations in Washington in April 1999, one of the aims of the United States in attacking Yugoslavia at that time on the pretext of preventing ethnic cleansing in Kosovo was to present to the European states a fait accompli as an example of the future role of NATO as an offensive organisation whose aim was to act as the world’s policeman, or more rightly thug, in the defence of perceived United States interests. It was clear that the US was intent on provoking a war with Yugoslavia and its subsequent bombardment.

How was this achieved? One of the final steps in the American strategy in attacking a sovereign state, Yugoslavia, which had not attacked any NATO member state, was the proposed Rambouillet Accords, February 23 1999. These show clearly that the Americans had no intention of pursuing a peaceful settlement of the Kosovo problem and that they intended to push Milosevic into a situation that he could not accept. In the words of Lamberto Dini, the then Italian Foreign Minister, the Rambouillet Accords were made deliberately to "humiliate the Serbs" so that they could not accept them.

Here I reproduce some of the worst points of the proposed Rambouillet Accords, Appendix B: Status of Multi-National Military Implementation Force:

3. The Parties recognize the need for expeditious departure and entry procedures for NATO personnel. Such personnel shall be exempt from passport and visa regulations and the registration requirements applicable to aliens. At all entry and exit points to/from the FRY (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, F.H.), NATO personnel shall be permitted to enter/exit the FRY on production of a national identification (ID) card. NATO personnel shall carry identification which they may be requested to produce for the authorities in the FRY, but operations, training, and movement shall not be allowed to be impeded or delayed by such requests.

--

6. a. NATO shall be immune from all legal process, whether civil, administrative, or criminal.

b. NATO personnel, under all circumstances and at all times, shall be immune from the Parties, jurisdiction in respect of any civil, administrative, criminal, or disciplinary offenses (sic) which may be committed by them in the FRY. The Parties shall assist States participating in the operation in the exercise of their jurisdiction over their own nationals.

--

7. NATO personnel shall be immune from any form of arrest, investigation, or detention by the authorities in the FRY. NATO personnel erroneously arrested or detained shall immediately be turned over to NATO authorities.

8. NATO personnel shall enjoy, together with their vehicles, vessels, aircraft, and equipment, free and unrestricted passage and unimpeded access throughout the FRY including associated airspace and territorial waters. This shall include, but not be limited to, the right of bivouac, maneuver (sic), billet, and utilization of any areas or facilities as required for support, training, and operations.

9. NATO shall be exempt from duties, taxes, and other charges and inspections and custom regulations including providing inventories or other routine customs documentation, for personnel, vehicles, vessels, aircraft, equipment, supplies, and provisions entering, exiting, or transiting the territory of the FRY in support of the Operation.

----

15. The Parties recognize that the use of communications channels is necessary for the Operation. NATO shall be allowed to operate its own internal mail services. The Parties shall, upon simple request, grant all telecommunications services, including broadcast services, needed for the Operation, as determined by NATO. This shall include the right to utilize such means and services as required to assure full ability to communicate, and the right to use all of the electromagnetic spectrum for this purpose, free of cost. In implementing this right, NATO shall make every reasonable effort to coordinate with and take into account the needs and requirements of appropriate authorities in the FRY.

---

17. NATO and NATO personnel shall be immune from claims of any sort which arise out of activities in pursuance of the operation; however, NATO will entertain claims on an ex gratia basis.

---

21. In carrying out its authorities under this Chapter, NATO is authorized to detain individuals and, as quickly as possible, turn them over to appropriate officials.

I have here only given some of the articles of the infamous Appendix. The others are more of the same ilk. The whole appendix is worth reading. These are some of the privileges which are for example enjoyed by US troops in Italy. (The new secret agreements being proposed between the US government and the Maliki puppet government in Iraq go much further). It was clear that the Rambouillet Accords were attacks on the sovereignty of Yugoslavia and that NATO wanted to completely take over Yugoslavia. The above conditions were obviously entirely unacceptable to a sovereign state and it was clear that these conditions were put so that Milosevic could not accept them and that the bombing of Serbia could start. In fact that is exactly what happened.

It should be clear and there is ample evidence of this, which I cannot reproduce here without making this article too long, that the attack on Yugoslavia had absolutely nothing to do with preventing ethnic cleansing and all to do with punishing a state that did not accept US diktat and was a crucial step towards reinventing the role of NATO.

Attentive readers in Pakistan will note the uncanny similarities between the proposed Rambouillet Accords of 1999 preceding the 78 day NATO bombardment of Yugoslavia and what Shirin Mazari, a Pakistani defence analyst and former head of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad (ISSI), revealed as a set of demands that the USA recently made to the Pakistan government (The News March 8, 2008). Although one can never be sure, I hope that the Musharraf government at that time and the present government have rejected these demands which negate Pakistani sovereignty. I wonder if the new “democratic” dispensation has given in to US pressure to remove Ms. Mazari from her position as head of the ISSI given her opposition to NATO presence in Afghanistan and her criticisms of US policy in the region.

It is relevant to point out that although the Serbian Parliament had agreed to an accord a day before the bombardment was started, this was deliberately ignored. Also significant is the fact that the final accord sanctioning Yugoslav withdrawal from Kosovo after 78 days of bombing achieved much less than what was being pushed in the Rambouillet Accords. So what was the point of bombardment if much less was acceptable? It was clear then and it is clearer now that the main idea was to change the nature of NATO as part of a broader strategy to dominate the Eastern Mediterranean and the oil routes from Central Asia.

The aim of reinventing the role of NATO into an aggressive arm of US foreign policy was achieved at the Washington meeting. The birth of the new NATO was sanctioned by the following words of the 19 heads of state and government on 24th April 1999:

This new alliance will be bigger, more capable and more flexible, involved in collective defence and capable of undertaking new missions, among which is the active commitment in the management of crises, including the operations of responding to crises. (Washington Summit Communiqué, 24/4/1999)

The newly born creature is the fruit of an operation of genetic engineering: from an alliance that, on the basis of Article 5 of the Treaty of 4 April 1949, authorised its member countries to assist (also with armed force) any member state that was attacked in the North Atlantic area, was transformed into an alliance that, on the basis of the new "strategic concept", commits the member countries also to conduct operations outside the territory of the Alliance (non-Article 5 operations). This was stressed several times in the document "The Alliance's Strategic Concept" approved by the Heads of State and government on April 24, 1999. For example in Article 31 it says

NATO will seek, in co-operation with other organisations, to prevent conflict, or should a crisis arise, to contribute to its effective management, consistent with international law, including through the possibility of conducting non-Article 5 crisis response operations. (The Alliance’s Strategic Concept, 24/4/1999; Defence Capabilities Initiative, 24/4/1999)

Remove the fig leaf of respect for international law and here you have the real intentions of NATO, to conduct operations throughout the world as it pleases.

To remove any doubt about the intentions of NATO, President Clinton clarified, during the press conference on 24 April 1999, that the North Atlantic Allies

have reaffirmed their readiness to affront, in appropriate circumstances, regional conflicts beyond the territory of the members of NATO. (Transcript: Clinton Says NATO May Intervene Beyond Its Borders, 24/4/1999)

To the question on what was the geographical area in which NATO was ready to intervene, "the President refused to specify to what distance NATO intended to project its force, saying that it was not a question of geography". In other words, NATO intended to project its military force beyond its borders not only in Europe, but also in other regions, like the Middle East, Africa and the Indian Ocean. NATO gave itself the right to intervene anywhere in the world whenever it feels its interests are threatened, without consulting the United Nations. Led by the biggest and most dangerous rogue state, the United States, NATO was set to become the gravest threat to peace throughout the world. One of the amazing and disgusting spectacles to watch in Europe in those days was that these so-called democracies accepted the new NATO without discussion in any of the European Parliaments. It is as if loyalty to NATO (which means in effect obedience to US diktat) has been put above all other considerations of national sovereignty and democracy. The Italian Prime Minister at that time, Massimo D’Alema, an ex-communist, said that Italy had to go to war because of its commitments and loyalty to NATO. He perhaps forgot that the principle of obeying orders while committing acts against humanity was not accepted at the Nuremberg trials as an attenuating circumstance.

It is worth remembering in these times, when one tends to blame Bush and his gang for all US aggressive imperialist policies, that all the above took place under the falsely admired Clinton and his Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, famous for her remark that the death of 500,000 Iraqi children as a consequence of the then embargo on Iraq was a justified price to pay to remove Saddam. We tend to forget that all US presidents follow such policies. As was obvious Bush and his gang whole-heartedly accepted the new role of NATO. If fact this was reemphasised in the recent NATO heads of states meeting in Romania where Bush explicitly said that the role of NATO was that of a “global expeditionary force”. These are terrible words that bode ill for the future of the world.

Yugoslavia of course could not and did not accept the demands made in the Rambouillet Accords and was therefore subject to savage bombing. The bombing of Serbia sanctioned NATO out of area operations and was a prelude to NATO involvement in Afghanistan as the handmaiden of the USA. NATO should never have been in Afghanistan in the first place and it is good to see that many European countries are reluctant to send their troops to die there. What is happening in Afghanistan is tragic with hundreds of innocents dying at the hands of indiscriminate bombing by US and NATO forces and by the retaliatory Taliban and resistance bombings but one thing is clear and that is that NATO will lose the war in Afghanistan. This is good because, I hope, that it will lead NATO to rethink its role in the post-cold war world and perhaps, if we are lucky, it may even be disbanded in the future. A NATO victory in Afghanistan will be disastrous for the region and for the world. It will encourage it in its Bush-designated role of a global “expeditionary alliance”. At the NATO summit in Bucarest in April Bush said about NATO: “It is now an expeditionary alliance that is sending its forces across the world to help secure a future of freedom and peace for millions.” In other words to interfere in and invade other poor countries of the south with the pretext of the new white man’s burden: promoting freedom and peace. The people of Iraq and Afghanistan have enough of this so-called freedom and peace. It is therefore necessary that NATO loses in Afghanistan.

A total withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan followed by a negotiated settlement between Afghan forces is the only way forward there. There are those who say that the withdrawal of NATO forces will lead to chaos, more deaths and re-talibanisation of Afghanistan. But the truth is that the presence of foreign troops is one of the major factors of violence there. What more chaos and destruction can there be in Afghanistan? All the touted aims of the USA and NATO are dead. There is no democracy there, Karzai is a US puppet, the warlords are in power and the level of insecurity is increasing, car bombs are becoming a norm. Pushtuns, as other peoples, never tolerate foreign occupation of their soil and to me it seems clear that the Taliban have mobilised Pushtun national sentiment in combating foreign troops.

Following the failure of NATO to defeat Afghan insurgents, the US blames Pakistan for providing sanctuary and training camps for Taliban and Al-Qaeda in the border region of Pakistan. But we have heard this before. When they cannot control the insurgency in Iraq they blame Iran or Syria for providing training and weapons to Iraqi insurgents. But this is an even older story. Those with a long memory will remember that when the US could not defeat the Vietnamese revolutionaries they said that there were training camps and sanctuaries in neighbouring Laos and Cambodia. One remembers the savage bombing of Cambodia from 1969 to 1973. It did not help the US to defeat the Vietnamese nationalists but lead to over a 100,000 Cambodian deaths to add to the 3 million Vietnamese killed during the war. Now they are bombing so-called Al-Qaeda and Taliban in Waziristan on dubious “actionable intelligence” in which hundreds of innocents are killed and this without a word of protest, if not connivance, on the part of our elected representatives.

It is a good sign that, in spite of continued US pressure, one of the first tasks that the new government in Islamabad has undertaken is a review of Pakistan’s involvement in America’s “war on terror”. An involvement that has already caused death and destruction in the frontier, disillusionment in the army and suicide bombings in major cities. There are reports of secret deals, made in January, between the USA and Musharraf’s government providing Predator bases inside Pakistan and changing rules of engagement of these aircraft whose controllers are now authorised to fire on suspicion rather than “hard” intelligence. One would like to know from the elected government whether there were such secret deals and if there were does it intend to repudiate them. Already the CIA and the FBI operate freely inside Pakistan and the Americans are demanding that we now accept ground troops in the guise of trainers for the Army and militia. They want to teach the Pakistan Army about counterinsurgency. If it were not so ominous it would be really quite hilarious given the singular failure of the US army in fighting guerrillas in Vietnam and now in Iraq and Afghanistan. What methods are they going to teach the Pakistan Army? Massive bombing and collective punishment in the best traditions of Vietnam?

Although the present government has taken some timid steps in distancing itself from the so-called “war on terror” and has rightly started to talk to the people of Waziristan, it has not gone far enough.

It has to clearly tell the USA that its policies in Afghanistan and in Pakistan’s frontier are a failure. They have only led to death, destruction and the spread of terrorism. The only way out is for all foreign forces to get out of Afghanistan and for the US to stop interference in Pakistan. Once these forces are out of the region then and only then will one be able to come to a political solution, as there is no purely military solution neither to the problems of Afghanistan nor to the rising phenomena of Islamic militancy in Pakistan.

Pushtuns have clearly voted against the mullahs and the militants but at the same time the rejection of Musharraf is also a sign that the people of Pakistan reject Pakistan’s forced marriage with the disastrous US policies in the region.

It is time for a clean divorce.

_________________________________________________

Don't continue doing what you can't for the zio-criminals. Be honest to yourself and the nation.





By William Blum at Information Clearing House.

The events of recent years indicate that the world is wising up to and becoming less intimidated by Washington's overarching ambition for world dominance. Latin America is increasingly attempting to escape the empire's clutches. Leaders keenly aware of how US imperialism works and determined to keep it out of their own country are in power in Venezuela, Uruguay, Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, and perhaps the latest addition, Paraguay.

And now Africa has turned down Washington's offer to be part of the imperial family. African governments have refused to host Africom, the US Africa Command. The Washington Post reported that "worry swept the continent that the United States planned major new military installations in Africa", and despite the promise of new development and security partnerships, many Africans concluded that Africom was primarily an extension of US counterterrorism policy, intended to keep an eye on Africa's large Muslim population. The United States "equates terrorism with Islam," said a senior Kenyan diplomat, and few African governments wanted to be seen as inviting US surveillance on their own people. [note from your editor: It would be more instructive to equate anti-American terrorism with American foreign policy, including building military bases in other people's countries.]

When Bush visited Africa in February, he was told by the Ghanian president: "You're not going to build any bases in Ghana." US-funded aid groups protested plans to expand the American military's role in economic development in Africa, sharply objecting to working alongside US troops. Said an Africom officer: "[Africom] was seen as a massive infusion of military might onto a continent that was quite proud of having removed foreign powers from its soil."

________________________________________________

Even the African has figured what is best for them, and have said no.......but in Pakistan....after half a century of the same experience............the Chamar chamcha in Pakistan haven't.

This is the core problem of Pakistan; a Zamindar class created by the Raj, that still follows the Raj---500 families; A few rich families that got rich doing business during the Raj---30 families, who still follow the Raj, and the military brass trained by the Raj and American's which follow their orders............

These classes needs t be eliminated if Pakistan is ever going to enjoy stability and a reasonable existence.

______________________________________________________

1. Going after Musharaf solely/only may be satisfying for those who suffered as one time political opponents of his, but going after him will largely be symbolic, as he is now a political dodo. Let him retire to London or Washington, or Riyadh, the places he goes to frequently to obtain 'guidance' and 'advice' or if you like orders of what to do in Pakistan.

The problem in Pakistan is at the political strategic level of thinking by the elite------making key political and strategic decisions which are pushed upon Pakistan by the West, which are then accepted by the elite in Pakistan, without filtering through with the consequences for Pakistan, in the short, medium and long term. Musharaf is a transitory figurehead of a national problem that is been prevalent since the creation of the country.

2. The foreign military bases in Pakistan need to be closed. They ought not to be used against Iran. Even if assurances are given that the bases will not be used against Iran, they must still be closed anyway. Quite simply America and the UK are bad for Pakistan, and you don't have to be a professor of political science to figure out this simple fact.

3. Foreign military advisers, and security personal must be asked to leave Pakistan. They certainly ought not to be wandering about in security sensitive areas.

4. General Mahmud Ahmed and all other senior personnel must be clearly ordered to expose the fake/hoax that the al-Qaeda organization is. Clear irrefutable information that since 2001 OBL is no more.

A paradigm shift in policy needs to be made by the elite of Pakistan for the survival of the nation.

Being honest with the nation and following the right policies would be a good start. Window dressing and gesture politics won't solve the enormous problems, social and political the new leadership must face in the coming years. If they don't deliver on their promises, then we will see political chaos, and a coup later. Remember the population will reach 400 million by 2050.

The new leaders of Pakistan have to be credible, and it starts with the above polices just suggested.