Why Hotels When You Have Belaire, Mr. President?

 ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Earlier this year, during his visit to New York, President Asif Ali Zardari stayed in a $6,000 per night Presidential Suite of the Roosevelt Hotel.

The 3,900 square feet suite has 4 bedrooms, a kitchen, formal living and dining areas, and a wrap-around terrace. In addition, he stayed at a $5,000 per night Willard Intercontinental Hotel in Washington DC. Even more money was wasted on the army of ministers and his son who accompanied him.

The question that is raised is why did a President of a country on war, with hundreds of thousands internally displaced refugees, and a country on the verge of defaulting, stay in a $6,000 per night suite? Why couldn’t he stay in a $600 per night luxury suite available at the same hotel; or even better, why couldn’t he stay in his vacant luxury apartment?

To this day, nobody knows the exact nature of Asif Zardari’s assets. TheNation is in possession of over 60 copies of at least one such property’s documents. The authentic copies of the legal property documents have Mr. Zardari’s signature, bank information and other pertinent information available on them.

The property is situated in the posh Upper East Manhattan, New York. The 72nd street to be precise. It’s a luxury apartment on the 37th floor with a stunning view of the river and the city. It is a part of the Belaire Condominiums. These luxury full service condominiums include amenities like a fabulous health club and glass enclosed heated lap pool.

Fit for a king or the President of Pakistan!

THE ISRAELI CONTROLLED BBC

Lyons Sir Michael Lyons is the Chairman of the, reportedly, much hated and utterly discredited BBC Trust.
Lyons is a Jew.
Anthony Fry is another of the BBC Trustees.
He has worked for the Rothschild Group.
The Independent (UK newspaper) on 16 April 2009 tells us about the BBC Trust which “is now a mouthpiece for the Israeli lobby.” (story here.)
What did Jeremy Bowen do wrong?
Gaius
Marcus Ambrose Paul Agius was appointed the senior non-executive director on the BBC’s executive board.
Born into a Jewish family, Agius is married to Katherine, daughter of Edmund de Rothschild of the Rothschild banking family of England, with two children, and has a close involvement with the Rothschild family estate, Exbury Gardens in Hampshire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Agius
Sharon had some strange friends.
1. The BBC “is literally behaving like it’s the Israeli state broadcaster.” – Jews sans frontieres
2. Lenin’s Tomb reminds us of this episode.
“What happened to BBC correspondent Orla Guerin just days after Mark Thompson had his cosy tete-a-tete with that obese blood-drenched old brute Ariel Sharon.
THOMPSON
“Before Thompson took up his position as Director General of the BBC, the Guardian had reported on the ferocious pressure being exerted on news organisations by the Israeli government, including complaints about individual reporters:
The Israeli government has written to the BBC accusing its Middle East correspondent, Orla Guerin, of anti-semitism and “total identification with the goals and methods of the Palestinian terror groups”.
“Orla Guerin’s offence was to run stories not just about the grief of Israeli families who had lost family members to suicide bombers but also stories about the grief and suffering of ordinary Palestinian families. As one blogger put it at the time:
Guerin’s real sin, of course, is to show some sympathy for the victims of the Israeli bombing (that’s enough to brand her a “terrorist”).
“Within days of Thompson meeting Sharon, Guerin was sacked as BBC TV Middle East correspondent and transferred to Africa.
Sharon had some strange friends.
3. ‘In November 2005, Thompson (the BBC’s boss) traveled with his Jewish wife to Israel, where he held direct talks with Sharon, which were intended to let the BBC build bridges with Israel’. – Mark Thomson and the Kosher BBC
4. Mark Thompson has been known to spend his holidays with his Jewish relatives in the USA.
He was educated by the Jesuits.
He is the Director General of the BBC.
He decided not to broadcast a charity appeal to help the stricken people of Gaza rebuild their homes. (BBC crisis over refusal to broadcast Gaza appeal)
The BBC isn’t doing well under its Director-General for the past five years, Mark Thompson.
According to Broadcast magazine, on 7 April 2009, the BBC suffered its second worst peaktime performance since at least 2001, managing an audience share of only 5.3 per cent.
(With less than a million viewers, BBC licence fee is as hard to …)
Thompson should be sacked.
Over the Gaza Appeal incident, Mark Thompson received backing from the BBC Trust’s chairman, Sir Michael Lyons, who is Jewish.
Sir Michael Lyons should be sacked.

Photo of Ed Vaizey by Kaihsu
ED VAIZEY, the UK CONSERVATIVE Party Culture Minister reveals himself to be a Zionist Jew when he says (Reaction to BBC Gaza appeal row ):
“The trouble with broadcasting an appeal from a war zone, is that there are two sides to the argument – and that’s what I think we’re seeing here.
“That’s why I think the BBC should be allowed to make the argument that it wants to preserve its impartiality on the issue.”
Sack Ed Vaizey!

US Secret War Inside Pakistan

by Richard Engel, NBC News Chief Foreign Correspondent

JALALABAD, Afghanistan – U.S. military officials don’t talk about our secret war in Pakistan.

Don’t even ask, I was told, on U.S. military bases in Afghanistan at Bagram and Jalalabad.

Don’t ask about the remotely-controlled American drones armed with missiles that are now hunting across the Pakistani border, searching through the mountain peaks, valleys and dusty villages inside Pakistan for the leaders of a few dozen networks of al-Qaida fighters, Taliban militants, warlords, weapons smugglers and opium traffickers.

VIDEO: Pakistan struggles to maintain power in a Taliban stronghold

And certainly don’t ask about the troops on bases here in Afghanistan who don’t wear uniforms, have long beards (so they can better blend in during covert operations), tattoos and don’t mingle with regular soldiers.

They eat in their own chow halls, plan their own missions and don’t talk much. They don’t talk at all to the media.  They’re the men who have been called in to cross into Pakistan when the drones can’t get deep enough to find and kill their targets.

They are elite Special Operations Forces, the most-highly trained and covert of the U.S. military. They are America’s ghost warriors. According to Pakistani villagers who claim to have witnessed their operations, the “Special Ops” work in small teams, fast roping out of helicopters, air assaulting their objective before the enemy can re-group.

Their strengths are rapid violence, stealth, mobility and surprise. The Special Operations Forces don’t receive much attention or credit in the media, but they’re leading America’s secret war inside Pakistan, at least for now.

The Army Times, a military newspaper, recently reported that the U.S. will temporarily halt ground incursions into Pakistan. The newspaper quoted an unnamed Pentagon official as saying, “We are now working with the Pakistanis to make sure that those types of ground-type insertions do not happen, at least for a period of time to give them an opportunity to do what they claim they are desiring to do.” The newspaper said the halt did not apply to the incursions by drones.

U.S. perspective
While details of American operations in Pakistan are sparse, several commanders have helped me understand the American motivation for the raids.

They say the cross-border incursions are necessary because the Pakistani government has failed to contain Taliban and al-Qaida fighters. Pakistan’s tribal region – 10,000 square miles along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan – has become a no-man’s-land where radical militants train, equip, rest, regroup, refit, plan and launch attacks on American troops in Afghanistan and on the Pakistani government in Islamabad.

Pakistan has taken some action. In August, the Pakistani military launched an offensive in Bajaur, a militant stronghold near the border. The Pakistani army is also building alliances with tribal leaders who have turned on the Taliban and al-Qaida.

But Pakistan’s actions have yet to produce significant results, according to tribal elders, witnesses, and the U.S. military. The border region remains a lawless insurgent safe haven that the United States has decided it can no longer tolerate.

From the U.S. perspective, the military had to act in Pakistan, a U.S. ally, because the Pakistani government and military could not, or would not, crack down on Islamic radicals.

Pakistan’s perspective
Sipping cups of green tea in a villa in Islamabad, I recently spoke for three hours with a Pakistani military official, who also worked for several years in his country’s intelligence service, to get the other side of the story. He argued passionately that both Pakistan and the United States share the same goal – to wipe out the dangerous radicals – but that the U.S. cross-border incursions are counter-productive.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, said Pakistan has deployed 120,000 troops along its border with Afghanistan, stationed at 1,000 posts. He compared Pakistan’s force to just over 30,000 U.S. troops at about 100 posts on the Afghan side of the border.

“You see where the insufficiency of forces is?” he asked.  “I don’t understand why [the Americans] don’t just kill the militants on their side of the border. They show us videos as proof of militants crossing into Pakistan. Why don’t they just sort them out there, in Afghanistan, instead of making videos?’”

I asked the Pakistani official about the U.S. cross-border raids. Do they help? Don’t they target the same people who plot attacks against Pakistan? Unlike the U.S. military, he had a lot to say.

The official claimed there have been about 50 drone incursions into Pakistan since this summer, along with roughly 10 “physical incursions.” He claimed the raids had killed “several hundred” civilians and were causing panic in the tribal areas.

“The villagers hear the buzzing [of the drones] and are terrified. They are scared to have weddings, funerals or any social gatherings, afraid they will be blown up by the drones,” he said.

The official also claimed the U.S. strikes undermine the Pakistani military’s ability to operate in the tribal areas. It’s a problem of logistics and terrain, he explained.

The few roads in the mountainous border area run through villages. Since the Pakistani military lacks aircraft, the roads are the army’s main supply line. The official argued that if the villagers, angered by American air strikes, turn on the Pakistani military – who are after all U.S. allies – they could cut off Pakistani troops.

“We may have to pull them out completely if [the American incursions] continue. We cannot leave the troops there, if we are cut off from supplies and can’t support them.”

Human toll
While the United States and Pakistan argue over the incursions, conditions in border villages are rapidly deteriorating. The mountain town of Swat was once known as the Switzerland of Pakistan, a resort where Pakistanis vacationed to escape the bustle of Islamabad and Karachi.  Today it is a battle zone.

According to a Pakistani military spokesman, in Swat Valley Taliban and al-Qaida fighters have burned down 111 girls schools, destroyed 37 government buildings, blown up 29 bridges, incapacitated the main power plant and cut the gas supply. Villagers are often completely without power.  Schools that haven’t been burned down don’t operate.

Not surprisingly, more than a quarter million refugees have escaped areas like Swat and Bajour.  At least 20,000 refugees have crossed into Afghanistan.  Aid workers say tens of thousands more may be coming.

What can be done?
A senior U.S. military official told me he’d heard Pakistan’s argument – leave us alone, we’ll handle it, stay out – a thousand times, but had yet to see results.

But what can the U.S. actually do?

It’s difficult to fight a secret war, especially here. The Special Operations Forces must fight in the mountains, far away from their bases in Afghanistan, against a battle-hardened enemy funded by the opium trade.

Since U.S. troops must operate covertly, they also can’t afford to lose a single man, fearing the enemy would drag his body Somalia-style through the streets, exposing their presence. The Americans also can’t leave anything behind, no equipment, no bags of MREs, no tracks, no trace they were there fighting America’s newest, most secret war.

Both American and Pakistani officials seem to agree that the only long-term solution to combating the militants in the border region is through better coordination.  For now, however, there’s little trust between the two sides, and suspicions are growing.

http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/10/07/1500617.aspx

INDIA IS RUN BY CRIMINALS?

Indian government minister Shibu Soren was convicted of murder. Some big democracies seem to be run in part by criminals.
This may work to the advantage of the CIA and Mossad when they want to influence policy on nuclear or terror issues.
In India, the world’s biggest democracy, there are ‘criminals’ in parliament and government.
At Newsweek, 7 March 2009, Jason Overdorf wrote about the criminals in India’s parliament. (New Rules Expose Criminals in India’s Parliament Newsweek)
In India’s current parliament, according to Newsweek:
The coal minister, Shibu Soren, stepped down after he was convicted of murder.
Shibu Soren had become coal minister after being put on trial for the alleged kidnapping and murder of his former personal secretary and the alleged massacre of 11 people in sectarian violence.
Several M.P.s are serving life sentences for murder.
128 of the 543 M.P.s have faced criminal charges, including:
84 cases of murder,
17 cases of robbery
and 28 cases of theft and extortion.
One M.P. faces 17 separate murder charges.
Eleven M.P.s have recently been expelled for taking bribes.
The two main parties are Congress and the BJP.
About a fifth of the representatives of these two major parties have been under investigation for criminal activity.
“The general opinion is that the influence of criminals in politics is steadily increasing,” states Himanshu Jha of the National Social Watch Coalition.
Singh
Is this important to Americans and Europeans?
In 2008, the USA and India made a nuclear pact.
Before the Indian parliament voted on this, Indian Prime Minister Singh and the Congress party were deserted by their allies from the left parties.
Then the Samajwadi Party, whose leader Mulayam Singh Yadav was being investigated for corruption by the Central Bureau of Investigation, switched to supporting the nuclear pact.
There were stories of cash being exchanged for votes.
The pact was passed in parliament.
The CBI dropped its case against the Samajwadi Party leader.
And the investigation into the “cash for votes” came to an end.
The Indian police are seen as being corrupt. Can a ‘corrupt’ police force hold an honest investigation of the Mumbai attack?
mostaqueali.blogspot.com/ tells us about Corruption in India and development.
Some of the points made:
1. “It’s estimated that disloyal corrupt criminalized Indians have stashed away around $1,500 billion … in illegal accounts in Switzerland alone.”
2. “The money illegally off shored represents anything between 50 – 70% of the GDP of India measured by PPP.”
3. “It all goes back to the British and the continuation of the British Raj system after ‘Independence’ in 1947. Basically if you are going to rule a country, loot it ($1 trillion worth of Indian assets transferred to London 1757 – 1947), sermonize over it and treat it very badly (30 million Indians died under British rule) then you need a lot of local criminalized chamars…
“The decendents of these chamars, along with their colonial practices have continued with business as usual.”
Mumbai by kentclark333
4. “A very simple modern example is Zardari in Pakistan…. who has done prison time for corruption, and has stashed away up to $2 billion of the impoverished nations wealth in foreign mainly Swiss accounts and in London.”
5. “India has 850 million people living on just 20 rupees a day, and 55 billionaires…”
According to Wikipedia, malnutrition in India’s Madhya Pradesh is worse than in Ethiopia or Sudan. (Poverty in India – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
aangirfan: BRUCE REIDEL, DAWOOD IBRAHIM and the BOMBAY ATTACKS
aangirfan: India falls in love with Israel and deserts Iran

India: Genocide Nation

india is the first country in the 21^st century to have a massive genocide: 2,000 burned alive in 2002. In Kashmir this month, Indian soldiers shoot and kill an aging Kashmiri politician during a peaceful protest. Four years ago, a European priest and his son were burned alive by long-haired, saffron-clad Hindu religious workers. Welcome to secularism’s false prophet, a nation of rising religious extremism, two dozen raging freedom movements, all hidden under the mask of a colorful film industry that provides distraction for a troubled country.

The Face Of India Hidden From The World

There is a distinct lobby in United States and Britain that played a criminal role in fostering Indian terrorism. It did this by covering up Hindu terrorism against Christians, Muslims, Sikhs and low-caste Indians. Have you seen any of the above pictures published by any American or British newspaper or news service? See [left] the charred bodies of Indian Muslims burned alive by Hindu mobs in 2002, in the 21^st century’s first genocide. And [center] you might think this picture is from a Hollywood movie set on pre-historic humans. No. These are Hindu religious devotees, or terrorists to be more accurate, who went on the rampage in a north Indian city in 1992 were they attacked and demolished a huge historical mosque going back 500 years. And to the right, the picture of an Indian woman who happened to be on the route of a mob of Hindus in the Gujrat genocide of 2002. She was an Indian Muslim. So they attacked her, tore her clothes off and then burned her alive.

Fading India In Kashmir

Tensions heightened when fanatic Hindu mobs imposed an economic blockade on the Jammu- Srinagar National Highway with Kashmiri Muslim truck drivers targeted. Indian Punjab, tellingly, followed suit, according to a BBC report, to once again expose the great myth of Indian secularism.

By Abbas Jafari

Friday, 15 August 2008.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

SRINAGAR, Pakistan—It started end of May and has built steadily ever since: the resistance to the Indian occupation of Jammu & Kashmir.

The movement began when the state government agreed to grant 40 hectares of forest land to the Amarnath Cave Shrine Board as the rest and recuperation area for Hindu pilgrimage to the cave. What followed is a general strike and students’ protests against the plan throughout the Muslim-majority state and persuaded the state government to take a stand, fearing this was another ploy by the Indian government to change the demography of the disputed state from Muslim to Hindu.
This prompted Hindu retribution and violent clashes were reported between Muslims, Hindus, police and the Hindu protestors in Jammu, with more troops having to be called in for a curfew to be imposed. Reports of assaults on Muslims poured in, along with Muslim homes being set ablaze.
Shutdowns followed across the entire Kashmir Valley called by a freedom leader, Syed Ali Shah Geelani, in an expression of solidarity with the Muslims in Jammu. Geelani noted that the administration had failed to protect the lives and properties of the Muslims in Jummu with Hindus on the rampage and matters began to spiral out of control.
Tensions heightened when fanatic Hindu mobs imposed an economic blockade on the Jummu- Srinagar National Highway with Kashmiri Muslim truck drivers targeted. Indian Punjab, tellingly, followed suit, according to a BBC report, to once again expose the great myth of Indian secularism.

Another BBC report from Srinagar had Muslim truck drivers refusing to travel on that road, fearful for their lives. The BBC Srinagar correspondent reported that fruit exports worth millions of dollars perished, as a consequence, with stocks of food grain, fuel and other needed supplies rapidly running out.

Just before retaliatory violence reached fever-pitch, a two-day end-July International Kashmir Peace Conference in Washington is reported to have called for “the establishment of an independent and credible investigative commission to probe human rights abuses”. This call was reinforced when Z.G. Muhammad, the acclaimed author of ‘The Cindering Chinars’ and ‘Kashmir in War and Diplomacy, quoted the venerated Mr. Yusuf Buch enunciating at the conference: “In Kashmir campaigns of murderous cruelty have been sustained for decades; when the population gets tired of militant insurgency, the repression seems to subside but when an act of police or paramilitary savagery is protested, the orgy
of murder and rape is re-enacted”.
Clearly aware of this, India’s prime minister, Dr Manmohan Singh turned to Hindu nationalist leader of the opposition, L.K Advani and called for an all-party conference to resolve the issue. But the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) represented by Mr Advani, was said to have been much more inclined towards guarding the interests of the Amarnath Sangharsh Samati (ASS): the spear-head of the Jummu
agitation. The ASS reportedly was not prepared to accept anything short of the allocation of the 40 acres of land to the Amarnath Shrine Board – based in Dehli!
Subsequently, an 18-member cross-party parliamentary delegation was dispatched to Jammu and Srinagar for a solution to draw the major concession from some of the moderates in Kashmir’s All Parties Huriayat Conference, of their having no objection to the Hindu demand for a separate state in contiguous areas where Hindus constituted the majority. These areas were identified as Jammu, Kathua, Samaba, Udhampur, and half of Resai, with the majority Muslim areas of Poonch, Rajouri, and Doda districts merged with the adjoining Muslim belt.

Simultaneously, the Conference endorsed the demand of the Kashmiri fruit farmers and traders to take their produce to across the Line of Control (LOC) to Muzzfarabad to draw in urgently needed supplies from across the border. On this India’s electronic media asked India’s home minister Shivraj Patil whether bifurcation or trifurcation (as Ladakh’s Leh district is Bhuddist) of Kashmir could be a possible solution, to which question the home minister replied he was not
competent to judge.

The upshot: an additional 10,000 troops deployed to disrupt the Muzaffarabad- bound march and more killings. With the government unable to stem the tide of unrest, the Huriyat Conference’s Ali Shah
Geelani and Mirwaiz Omer Farooq were quickly put under house arrest,
while Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JFKL) leader, Mohammad Yasin
Malik’s fast-unto-death protest saw him hospitalized and in critical condition. If that was not enough, Indian security forces then shot dead an alleged resistance fighter along with two farmers and following that, an important Huryiat Conference leader, Sheikh Abdul Aziz, together with an unspecified number of others, as a reported 100,000 protestors began their march to Muzaffarabad.
Despite curfew being imposed in all 10 districts of Indian-occupied Kashmir close to 250,000 gathered for the funeral prayers of the slain leader and thousands are reported to have stormed Geelani’s home to free him. Farooq too was released soon after and the two called for peace as communal killings ravaged the Valley. But are peace and harmony possible in an area where the Muslim majority sees itself persecuted for its religious beliefs?
Zafar Choudhary, in his Countercurrent August 8 article ‘Why is Jammu
burning’ underplays this. He writes, “What has shattered in last 45 days is the myth that ‘Jammu’ and ‘Kashmir’ can behave like a common entity called ‘Jammu and Kashmir’…In the early days of agitation, the popular slogans heard in Jammu were “we want the land returned … These slogans are no more audible. Now people are asking for an end to Kashmir’s domination over Jammu. The problem is now no more between the government and the local people on a controversial decision. It has been now projected as Jammu versus Kashmir… When small spark has put the state on fire it has also demonstrated that efforts of dousing flames in one region may well prove as fuel in the other. It is high time that New Delhi’s Kashmir policy is redrawn and sentiments beyond Kashmir are also taken care of.”
That as it may, the sentiments evoked on the Jammu blockade have accentuated Muslim-Hindu differences in Kashmir and the front-page picture of the crowd gathered to pay homage to Sheikh Abdul Aziz published in Pakistan’s Daily Times on Wednesday August 13, is indeed worth a

India’s ‘Hindu Al-Qaeda’: Why Hindu Extremists Invaded Taj Mahal?

SECOND REPORT
A group of saffron-clad Hindu extremists entered the Muslim marvel of Taj Mahal, started walking around the monument performing Hindu prayers. Welcome to India’s Hindu terrorists. India is creating al-Qaeda-style civilian militant groups and arming them with heavy weapons. Financing is coming from the narco-trade run by none other than Indian military. This is the face of India that New Delhi’s image makers want to hide from the world.

By ABDUL RUFF Colachal

Saturday, 26 July 2008.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

NEW DELHI, India—India is said to be multi-faceted nation with a flourishing multi-culturalism and securalism, but in reality it expects Muslims and other minorities to make way for the Hindu onward march in every field.

Hindus want every thing in India for themselves. They have enjoyed all benefits of progress and development to themselves leaving nothing to Muslims, except insults and jails.

This write up focuses on Indian chauvinistic activities in the spheres of religion, cultural heritage of Muslims, the plight of Kashmiris and the hidden agenda of the Indian occupation of Jammu & Kashmir.

ONE: Why should India train Hindu extremists, Militants and others?

A group of 10 Hindutva activists-cum-militants belonging to Shiv Sena, a core fundamentalist political outfit, sneaked into the Taj Mahal at Agra on July 24 and performed prayers (puja) within the precincts on Thursday. They were taken into custody and later released without any hurdles.

The Hindu Shiv Sena activists, including three women, bought tickets and entered one by one into the Taj Mahal in the afternoon. They performed some kind of puja and ‘parikrama’ (circling of the monument) of the Muslim edifice/ structure with folded hands. After a while they were forced to stop the ritual when some people brought the matter to the ‘knowledge’ of the security personnel, who in the first place allowed them to enter and even saw them wearing saffron scarves. A minor scuffle ensued after which the police took them to the Taj Ganj Police station.

This is a routine matter for Indian governments when Hindus perform illegal activities. Had Muslims enter the temples and remove the idols and clean up the structure to be able to offer prayers to God, the matter would be different.

Hindu outfits, who consider themselves above law and have every right to do anything they please with Muslims and their mosques, have been on a rampage for political reasons with concocted stories against Islam.

The latest story or discovery of Hindu extremists and their researchers led by Shiv Sena is that the 17^th century monument is actually a Shiva temple. Hindu extremists have announced earlier that they would perform puja and aarti on every Monday during the Hindu month of ‘Shravan’, considered auspicious for the worship of Shiva. This past Monday, they had been prevented from entering the Taj Mahal. They later performed the ‘rituals’ at the Taj Mahal corridor.

A Shiv Sena chief in Agra said they had gone there as ordinary citizens of India and felt like praying. ‘So, what’s wrong with that,’ he asked. The officer belonging to the Archaeological Society of India who is in-charge of the Taj Mahal tried to justify what the Hindu fundamentalists tried to do at the Taj Mahal:

“They came in a group as ordinary citizens and purchased tickets. We were with them all the time along with the Taj Ganj police station in-charge. With folded hands they went towards the mosque and went back. How could we have prevented their entry as they did nothing objectionable? I don’t know why such a hullabaloo is being made about it. They told me their program is for Mondays and had come today just to see the Taj Mahal.”

As a Hindu extremist organization thriving on anti-Islamic and anti-Minority sentiments, Siva Sena’s activities, like any other extremist religious groups, are supposed to be under scrutiny by the government, but as this incident shows, the government knows about such activities and knew in this case what the Hindu extremists were planning to do, and yet the Indian authorities allowed the Hindus do their prayers (puja) inside the Taj Mahal. The Hindus were conducting their worship in a Muslim mosque which houses the tomb of the wife of the Moghul emperor.

Enough of this nonsense for this nation where people are being divided along religious and fundamentalist lines. It is high time Indian judiciary stepped in to clear up the Hindutva mess the rulers over decades have created in appeasing the majority population.

TWO - Why India trains Hindu militants?

Even as India keeps blaming Pakistan of training freedom fighting Kashmiris, it also trains the Hindu militants and Kashmiri Muslims. With this Indian strategists have decided to kill Kashmiris directly by Hindus themselves, leading a civil war in Jammu & Kashmir. The great idea behind this new scheme is to delay granting independence to Jammu & Kashmir.

As if state terrorist forces are not enough to kill the Kashmiri Muslims, now the UPA government of India and the Indian-occupied J&K government under Governor’s rule have embarked upon a massive training of Hindu militants in Jammu region to fight the so-called Muslim ‘terrorists’, which only means Kashmir Muslims, who still demand sovereignty back from the occupying terror forces of India.

After establishing Village Defense Committees (VDC) and handing people with modern weaponry in hilly areas of Jammu province to fight militancy’, Indian terror security agencies are now busy establishing Self Defense Committees (SDC) in all the hilly villages of Jammu. The SDCs would be like VDCs but every member of SDC is given an AK-47 rifle and other heavy weaponry to use against anybody without any accountability. The SDCs consist of 15 volunteers from every village who are registered with the police department before receiving rifles and ammunition.

Thus, Sarankote Police Station in Poonch district has been converted into a zonal office for registering SDCs and people are being introduced to SDCs through the public address system and many SDCs have already been registered. ‘The people who are being registered as members of SDCs are mostly illiterate and there is every possibility that these people can misuse the weapons for their personal grudges or animosities. This can result in a civil war in the area,’ says an elderly inhabitant of Poonch.

This policy of distributing heavy weapons to local civilian militias has anguished the Muslim population in these areas, who feel threatened as police is handing over the weapons only to the members of Hindu community.

Yet, the moot question remains: Why should India train extra Hindus when it has surplus terror military forces, charged with the ‘patriotic’ task of killing the Kashmiris and when they have been doing the ‘job’ pretty well over decades as heavy militarization of Jammu Kashmir by India, killing thousands of innocent Kashmiris?

THREE -  India promotes Narcotics in JK

Very few Indians know that their military units are thoroughly corrupt. Anti-social and anti-people activities like smuggling and narcotics are a part of the Indian military services. Police on 10 July arrested an Indian army trooper and recovered heroin worth Rs. 10,000,000 fom his possession in Rajouri district.

Acting on a tip-off, police intercepted soldier Sumeet Singh at Inphaja Morh in Kandi belt Saturday night and recovered the heroin. Singh, who is working with 13 Jammu and Kashmir Light Infantry regiment, is presently posted at Udhampur and was on leave when arrested. A case under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPSA) has been registered against him. Military establishment has confirmed the arrest.

It is amusing to note that Indian propaganda abroad includes branding Kashmiris, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis as terrorists and placing slur on Kashmiri, Afghani and Pakistani Muslims involved in drug trade and narcotics.

Genocide, secret mass graves, illegal land grabs, economic terrorism, promotion of Hindu religion in Kashmir, and now trade in narcotics and drugs are the goals of the occupying Indian terror forces from India in Kashmir.

Al Qaeda — the Database

Shortly before his untimely death, former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook told the House of Commons that “Al Qaeda” is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan. Courtesy of World Affairs, a journal based in New Delhi, WMR can bring you an important excerpt from an Apr.-Jun. 2004 article by Pierre-Henry Bunel, a former agent for French military intelligence.

Wayne Madsen Report

---

“I first heard about Al-Qaida while I was attending the Command and Staff course in Jordan. I was a French officer at that time and the French Armed Forces had close contacts and cooperation with Jordan . . .

“Two of my Jordanian colleagues were experts in computers. They were air defense officers. Using computer science slang, they introduced a series of jokes about students’ punishment.

“For example, when one of us was late at the bus stop to leave the Staff College, the two officers used to tell us: ‘You’ll be noted in ‘Q eidat il-Maaloomaat’ which meant ‘You’ll be logged in the information database.’ Meaning ‘You will receive a warning . . .’ If the case was more severe, they would used to talk about ‘Q eidat i-Taaleemaat.’ Meaning ‘the decision database.’ It meant ‘you will be punished.’ For the worst cases they used to speak of logging in ‘Al Qaida.’

“In the early 1980s the Islamic Bank for Development, which is located in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, like the Permanent Secretariat of the Islamic Conference Organization, bought a new computerized system to cope with its accounting and communication requirements. At the time the system was more sophisticated than necessary for their actual needs.

“It was decided to use a part of the system’s memory to host the Islamic Conference’s database. It was possible for the countries attending to access the database by telephone: an Intranet, in modern language. The governments of the member-countries as well as some of their embassies in the world were connected to that network.

“[According to a Pakistani major] the database was divided into two parts, the information file where the participants in the meetings could pick up and send information they needed, and the decision file where the decisions made during the previous sessions were recorded and stored. In Arabic, the files were called, ‘Q eidat il-Maaloomaat’ and ‘Q eidat i-Taaleemaat.’ Those two files were kept in one file called in Arabic ‘Q eidat ilmu’ti’aat’ which is the exact translation of the English word database. But the Arabs commonly used the short word Al Qaida which is the Arabic word for “base.” The military air base of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia is called ‘q eidat ‘riyadh al ‘askariya.’ Q eida means “a base” and “Al Qaida” means “the base.”

“In the mid-1980s, Al Qaida was a database located in computer and dedicated to the communications of the Islamic Conference’s secretariat.

“In the early 1990s, I was a military intelligence officer in the Headquarters of the French Rapid Action Force. Because of my skills in Arabic my job was also to translate a lot of faxes and letters seized or intercepted by our intelligence services . . . We often got intercepted material sent by Islamic networks operating from the UK or from Belgium.

“These documents contained directions sent to Islamic armed groups in Algeria or in France. The messages quoted the sources of statements to be exploited in the redaction of the tracts or leaflets, or to be introduced in video or tapes to be sent to the media. The most commonly quoted sources were the United Nations, the non-aligned countries, the UNHCR and . . . Al Qaida.

“Al Qaida remained the data base of the Islamic Conference. Not all member countries of the Islamic Conference are ‘rogue states’ and many Islamic groups could pick up information from the databases. It was but natural for Osama Bin Laden to be connected to this network. He is a member of an important family in the banking and business world.

“Because of the presence of ‘rogue states,’ it became easy for terrorist groups to use the email of the database. Hence, the email of Al Qaida was used, with some interface system, providing secrecy, for the families of the mujaheddin to keep links with their children undergoing training in Afghanistan, or in Libya or in the Beqaa valley, Lebanon. Or in action anywhere in the battlefields where the extremists sponsored by all the ‘rogue states’ used to fight. And the ‘rogue states’ included Saudi Arabia. When Osama bin Laden was an American agent in Afghanistan, the Al Qaida Intranet was a good communication system through coded or covert messages.

Meet “Al Qaeda”

“Al Qaida was neither a terrorist group nor Osama bin Laden’s personal property . . . The terrorist actions in Turkey in 2003 were carried out by Turks and the motives were local and not international, unified, or joint. These crimes put the Turkish government in a difficult position vis-a-vis the British and the Israelis. But the attacks certainly intended to ‘punish’ Prime Minister Erdogan for being a ‘toot tepid’ Islamic politician.

” . . . In the Third World the general opinion is that the countries using weapons of mass destruction for economic purposes in the service of imperialism are in fact ‘rogue states,” specially the US and other NATO countries.

” Some Islamic economic lobbies are conducting a war against the ‘liberal” economic lobbies. They use local terrorist groups claiming to act on behalf of Al Qaida. On the other hand, national armies invade independent countries under the aegis of the UN Security Council and carry out pre-emptive wars. And the real sponsors of these wars are not governments but the lobbies concealed behind them.

“The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.”

In yet another example of what happens to those who challenge the system, in December 2001, Maj. Pierre-Henri Bunel was convicted by a secret French military court of passing classified documents that identified potential NATO bombing targets in Serbia to a Serbian agent during the Kosovo war in 1998. Bunel’s case was transferred from a civilian court to keep the details of the case classified. Bunel’s character witnesses and psychologists notwithstanding, the system “got him” for telling the truth about Al Qaeda and who has actually been behind the terrorist attacks commonly blamed on that group. It is noteworthy that that Yugoslav government, the government with whom Bunel was asserted by the French government to have shared information, claimed that Albanian and Bosnian guerrillas in the Balkans were being backed by elements of “Al Qaeda.” We now know that these guerrillas were being backed by money provided by the Bosnian Defense Fund, an entity established as a special fund at Bush-influenced Riggs Bank and directed by Richard Perle and Douglas Feith.

French officer Maj. Pierre-Henri Bunel, who knew the truth about “Al Qaeda” — Another target of the neo-cons

Pakistan The Next US Target

Bill Kristol, a Fox Television commentator and arch American neoconservative revealed recently what many had long suspected was US thinking about the current international situation.

Kristol recounts that in a 90-minute, mostly off-the-record meeting with a small group of journalists in early July, President Bush “conveyed the following impression, that he thought the next president’s biggest challenge would not be Iraq, which he thinks he’ll leave in pretty good shape, and would not be Afghanistan, which is manageable by itself… It’s Pakistan.” We have “a sort of friendly government that sort of cooperates and sort of doesn’t. It’s really a complicated and difficult situation.” Right on cue, presidential candidate Barack Obama took the baton from Bush in his speech on July 15, in which he argued that more focus and resource were required on both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The Kristol revelation on the surface is staggering yet not a surprise to those who have long suspected that the US presence in Afghanistan constitutes a Trojan horse for a more insidious plan the US has for Pakistan. Some may find it surprising that the US now believes Pakistan to be more challenging than Iraq where the US has 150,000 troops, spent almost a trillion dollars and has incurred over 4,000 fatalities. The neocon vision was that the capture of Iraq, a state that lies at the heart of the Middle East, would allow it to control not just the resources of the region but more importantly its geopolitics. Of course, the post invasion challenge was severely underestimated and despite some reduction in violence (albeit from a high benchmark), Iraq remains a quagmire. The US would like Iraq to be ‘stable’ but not too stable, ‘independent’ but not too independent, have an ‘effective’ military but not too effective. John McCain compares the US role in Iraq with that of Korea and Germany and believes the US could be there for a hundred years. To justify a continued presence the US needs to keep Iraq weak and divided. No one can seriously dispute the growth in sectarianism that has been seen since US occupation. With a self governed Kurdish north, a Shia dominated central government and now US support for the Sunni tribes, General Petraeus has presided over a de facto partitioned state.
So, with Iraq closer to de facto partition, America can now turn its attention to Pakistan. This change of focus has been sign posted now for at least twelve months. In June 2007 the US published its National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) with some startling new revelations. Despite citing its numerous successes against Al-Qa’idah since September 2001 including these statements in a declassified document titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States” dated April 2006 stated the following “United States – led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of Al-Qa’idah and disrupted its operations… We assess the global jihadist movement is decentralised, lacks a coherent global strategy, and is becoming more diffuse.”
Yet the collective US intelligence community made a volte-face fourteen months later when it said the following: “We assess the group (Al-Qa’idah) has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safe haven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership.”

So, in effect what the US intelligence community was saying was that its six year war against Al-Qa’idah had been a failure and that to win the war effectively required action within Pakistan. The pretext for war within Pakistan was therefore created; any attack on any US target from now on that was traced to the FATA would give the US casus belli to undergo a massive retaliatory attack within Pakistan. Indeed Frances Townsend Homeland Security adviser to Bush said shortly after the NIE was published that the United States would be willing to send troops into Pakistan to root out Al-Qa’idah, noting specifically that “no option is off the table if that is what is required”
The US has been itching to get into Pakistan for some time.
Firstly, using remote controlled Predator aircraft to attack targets within Pakistan almost on a daily basis.
Secondly, the US has spent $10 billion on Pakistan’s military since 2001 and more specifically in trying to make Pakistan’s Frontier Corps into a fighting unit for the US military. To ensure Washington gets better value for money, Senator Joe Biden, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, is seeking to enact legislation in Congress to tie future security aid to performance.
Thirdly, by promoting General Petraeus from heading up the Iraq campaign to become Central Command (CENTCOM’s) new head clearly indicates that Iraq has become subservient to Pakistan in Washington’s thinking.
Fourthly, the continued barrage of criticism within Capitol Hill, by Afghan officials and western think tanks of Pakistan’s failure to stem cross border insurgency prepares the ground for an eventual attack in Pakistan. Indeed eliminating the Pakistan sanctuary bases is one of the RAND Corporation’s key recommendations in a recent report, funded by the IS DOD, entitled “Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan.” The report does not confine criticism to the FATA but states that the insurgency also finds refuge in the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) as well as the province of Balochistan so extending the area substantially for future retaliation.
Lastly, according to a New York Times report in June, top Bush administration officials drafted a secret plan in 2007 to make it easier for US Special Operations forces to operate inside Pakistan’s tribal areas but that turf battles and the diversion of resources to Iraq held up the effort. However, now that forces are being reduced in Iraq, it is inevitable that such programs will be stepped up.
So, why is Pakistan so important?
Mitchell Shivers Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Asian & Pacific Security Affairs gave the following reasons in his testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 25 June 2008:
Firstly, Pakistan is the second most populous Muslim state, the sixth most populous country in the world, and is located at the geopolitical crossroads of South and Central Asia.
Second, Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons and has already fought three conventional wars with another nuclear nation next door, India.
Third Pakistan has a large, growing moderate middle class striving for democracy.
Fourth, elements of extremism and terrorism are at work within Pakistan sponsored by the usa and India.
Fifth, the whole-hearted assistance of the Pakistani people and their government will help the United States achieve its national security objectives in Afghanistan.
Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in an article in the Washington Post in March defined US objectives in Pakistan as “control of nuclear weapons, counter-terrorism cooperation and resistance to Islamic radicalism” and believes Pakistan could turn “into the wildcard of international diplomacy.” This was echoed by Turkey’s military chief General Yaşar Büyükanıt who speaking in March at an international conference in Ankara warned that Pakistan’s political troubles could open the way for the Taliban to seize the country and its nuclear weapons.
The US fears Pakistan, as it contains the key mix of Islam, nuclear weapons and people who are impatient for change and who do not trust the Americans. Consistent surveys indicates that the US’s approval ratings are less than 20% in Pakistan and that the people of Pakistan desire for Islamic rule does not equate to a desire for violent extremism. The desire for Islamic governance allied with the above ingredients clearly illustrate why Pakistan has risen to the top of Washington’s radar screen and why Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has now made four visits to Pakistan since February.
What about the war in Afghanistan, how does this fit into the plan for Pakistan?
Of course, Afghanistan has some value to the US but the campaign as Kristol admits will be allowed to continue on the back burner. The US objective for Afghanistan was never to defeat the Taliban or to extend its remit over the whole country. Indeed if it was the objective, the US would have sent more troops. The Soviet Union in comparison had 300,000 troops in the 1980’s and while occupying the cities, could never pacify the countryside. The US and NATO presence at about 65,000 is almost laughable when facing a population of 31 million. The US campaign in Afghanistan is more a forward base combining Special Forces and CIA operatives backed up with airpower and a modest number of US ground forces. The mission in 2001 was to coordinate the fight with allies within the Northern Alliance and amongst other minorities and disgruntled anti-Taliban elements. Geo-strategically, Afghanistan has limited value for the US, other than to ensure no one else should control it. This explains why the priority given to Afghanistan will always be less than Iraq and certainly lower than Pakistan. It also explains why Afghanistan is in the shambles it is.
According to the Afghanistan Human Development Report 2007, Afghanistan remains far behind neighbouring countries with a rank of 174 out of 178 on the global HDI (a composite indicator that measures education, longevity, and economic performance). 6.6 million Afghans do not meet their minimum food requirements. 2006 witnessed a significant rise in attacks and a 59% spike in the area under poppy cultivation, making the country a world leader in the production of illegal opium (90% of global production). Low literacy and a lack of access to safe drinking water, food, and sanitation contribute to the still relatively high child mortality rate. With the maternal mortality ratio estimated at 1600 deaths per 100,000 live births, Afghanistan maintains one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the world.
How should Muslims in the region respond? They need to do at least three things:
A. Pakistan should realise what the US is trying to do. It doesn’t require an international relations genius to conclude that the US is seeking to do to Pakistan what it has done to Iraq, namely decimating its military capability and fracturing the country into separate entities. The army who effectively control Pakistan are not stupid; they understand the political dynamic at place. Four Star General Tariq Majeed, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee recently said at an international conference in Singapore that cross-border missile strikes into Pakistan’s tribal belt are killing civilians and contributing to the popular perception that U.S. military operations in the region are “anti-Islam.” They understand that when the US talks about reforming the Frontier Corps, this is about ensuring that they fight more effectively for the US, not Pakistan. They also understand that while the US has a tactical relationship with Pakistan, it seeks a strategic relationship with India even to the extent of offering it unprecedented civil nuclear assistance. The $10 billion that the US has given Pakistan since 2001 means nothing, if Pakistan eventually fragments into multiple pieces. With NWFP, Balochistan and Karachi all teetering at the edge, the US has a once in a generation opportunity to turn Pakistan into a balkanised hell hole.
B. The only supply lines into Afghanistan for the US are either through the mountains of Central Asia or through the port of Karachi. Without Pakistan, logistics, the flow of supplies, fuel and other military hardware would soon stop the campaign in Afghanistan. There is no strategic interest for Pakistan to continue to support America’s war in Afghanistan.
Firstly, it allows 65,000 NATO and US troops to permanently occupy a Muslim country creating an anti Pakistani government in Kabul.
Secondly instead of having a secure western border, Pakistan has to have 100,000 troops permanently supporting the US effort thus taking valuable resources from it’s more vulnerable eastern border with India.
Thirdly, Pakistan has to face the blowback, of fighting not just its own citizens in NWFP and FATA, but fellow Muslims across the border.
Lastly, the people of Pakistan and Afghanistan have to realise that neither brutal dictatorship nor secular democracy can succeed in the Muslim world. As has been witnessed since February, Pakistan’s political class have no solutions with respect to high fuel costs, high food prices and the deterioration in the financial environment. The Afghan President has also presided over a country where after nearly 7 years, hunger, corruption, electricity shortages and killing civilians are the watchwords of today’s Afghanistan.
Only the tried and trusted Islamic system of the Khilafah (Caliphate) can succeed in the Muslim world. A coherent effort at re-establishing the Khilafah is now the urgent requirement and is gaining momentum. According to an opinion poll carried out by the University of Maryland, 74% of Pakistanis support the establishment of a unified Khilafah in the Muslim world, the establishment of such an entity is therefore not a question of if, but when.
Indeed the major problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan are not one of economic resources but of political will. Afghanistan and Pakistan are not ‘failing states.’  Unfortunately, for the people of Afghanistan they’ve been invaded twice by external powers in the last 25 years and this remains the hub of their problem. For the Pakistani people they have seen over 60 years of political failure with so called “independence” a mere charade.
Yet the world is entering a new paradigm in international relations. No longer will the Fed in Washington be calling the shots. No longer will the Dollar reign supreme. No longer is the US military invincible. What started with self evident truths in Philadelphia over two centuries ago has now morphed into implosion on Wall Street and an economic tsunami across the globe.
Many cite the Khilafah as a utopian dream, yet those in the know are not so sure. A US government intelligence study by the National Intelligence Council in 2004 called “Mapping the Global Future” presented as one future scenario the rise of a new pan-national Caliphate. Thomas Ricks the Washington Post’s senior Pentagon correspondent in his book “Fiasco” says there is precedent for the emergence of a unifying figure in the Muslim world a modern day Saladin someone who can revive the region through combining popular support with huge oil revenues. A real “nightmare scenario” for the western world as Richard Nixon once described it in his book 1999.
So Muslims face a strategic choice either support the US led coalition or politically unify under the banner of Islam. Whereas the former guarantees national oblivion and further balkanisation, the latter should allow the Muslim world to flourish and meet head on the challenges of the 21st century.

Anti-War Candidate, Pro-War Cabinet?

“I don’t want to just end the war; I want to end the mindset that got us into war.”
– Barack Obama
Feb. 19, 2008
Background: Here are some claims by named and possible officials in an Obama administration:
JOSEPH BIDEN: Voted in 2002 to authorize the invasion of Iraq. In his floor speech at the time he claimed: “[Saddam Hussein] possesses chemical and biological weapons and is seeking nuclear weapons.” As then-chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he oversaw hearings which excluded former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter and other individuals who where highly critical of claims regarding Iraq’s alleged possessions of weapons of mass destruction. See: “Biden: What Kind of Foreign Policy ‘Experience’?” http://accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1784
HILLARY CLINTON: Voted for the 2002 authorization for the Iraq war. In her 2002 floor speech, she stated that “intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.” (Oct. 10, 2002) http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
RICHARD HOLBROOKE: Was ambassador to the United Nations toward the end of the Clinton administration. Claimed shortly after Colin Powell’s speech to the UN: “It was a masterful job of diplomacy by Colin Powell and his colleagues, and it does not require a second vote to go to war. … Saddam is the most dangerous government leader in the world today, he poses a threat to the region, he could pose a larger threat if he got weapons of mass destruction deployed, and we have a legitimate right to take action.” (MSNBC, Jan. 23, 2003)

DENNIS ROSS: Mideast envoy during the Clinton administration, he made numerous appearances on Fox News Channel during the build-up for the Iraq invasion pressing for war, for example: “And the fact is that [Hussein] felt he was able to continue to pursue weapons of mass destruction, even while all of the resolutions demanding his disarmament were put into play, and you had inspectors on the ground.” (Fox News Channel, Dec. 22, 2002)
JOHN KERRY: Voted for the 2002 authorization for the Iraq war. Stated at the time: “Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don’t even try? … According to intelligence, Iraq has chemical and biological weapons … Iraq is developing unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents…” (Oct. 9, 2002) http://accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=375
SUSAN RICE: Assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration. Before the invasion of Iraq, she claimed: “I think he [then Secretary of State Colin Powell] has proved that Iraq has these weapons and is hiding them, and I don’t think many informed people doubted that.” (NPR, Feb. 6, 2003) http://accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1737
BILL RICHARDSON: Was ambassador to the United Nations during the Clinton administration in the late 1990s during which time he claimed Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction: “We think this man is a threat to the international community, and he threatens a lot of the neighbors in his region and future generations there with anthrax and VX.” (Feb. 11, 1998) http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june98/iraq_2-11.html

Must Read: CIA Versus ISI

Why CIA Is Engaged In Motivated Campaigns Against Pakistan’s ISI, Military?

The American CIA almost killed Musharraf.  The ISI is familiar with terrorism inside Pakistan by the spy agencies of many countries. Even Libya’s Gaddafi once ordered a couple of bombings here after the execution of his friend Mr. Bhutto. But this is the first time that the CIA is found directly involved in working against Pakistani interests. The U.S. spy organization is sponsoring the multibillion dollar Afghan drug trade, helped by the Indians. CIA’s latest trash is a statement by a U.S. congresswoman and a book by a third-rate American journalist both aimed at discrediting the ISI in the eyes of its own people. The million dollar question is this: Why is CIA sponsoring the campaign to tarnish Pakistani image worldwide, from the nuclear scare to the breakup scare to the ‘terrorist’ scare? The answer is astonishing.

By Sandra Johnson in Washington DC
Christina Palmer in New Delhi
Jamal Afghani in Kabul
Makhdoom Babar in Islamabad
Tuesday, 17 February 2009.
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Coffee and aspirin, aspirin and coffee. This is what the Chief of Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency, the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Lt. General Ehsan-ul-Haque was repeating after he went through the news on the website of a U.S. newspaper in which a news report filed by a U.S. news agency claimed quoting “U.S. intelligence sources” that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf survived the bomb attack on his motorcade because the President’s limousine was equipped with state-of-the-art jamming devices.

The news appeared on Dec. 18, 2003, shortly after former President Musharraf’s motorcade was attacked through a remote controlled device connected to a cell phone on a bridge in Rawalpindi.

“What the hell is this, we discussed this jamming device thing with them just a day before and they have leaked it to the media straight away? What are they up to? Are they helping us or al-Qaeda by telling them that President’s car cannot be bombed through a remote device? Are they trying to guide these killers so that they go for a suicide attack next time?” Gen. Ehsan asked his aides, sitting there to discuss the issue.

And true to his prediction, after a gap some 15 to 20 days, Musharraf’s motorcade was subjected to a high profile suicide attack on the same road a just a few yards away from the previous incident. However the Pakistani President survived again.

This has been the biggest dilemma of Pakistan’s ISI ever since Islamabad decided to be an ally in America’s global war on terror. Right from day one, Pakistan’s Foreign Office and the ISI sleuths have been complaining about the constant leaking in the U.S. media by ‘U.S. intelligence sources’ of intelligence reports and highly classified. The former President of the Islamic Republic, Pervez Musharraf, who was also the head of the country’s army, conveyed these reservations about intelligence leakages many times to U.S. officials and made it very clear to the former U.S. President George W. Bush that Pakistan and particularly the ISI were not comfortable at all with such a state of affairs. The U.S. was told in clear terms that this menace of constant leakages of classified material to the U.S. media had become a very big hardship for the continuation of anti-terror operations.

Terrorism in nothing new to Pakistan, neither is its top security agency, the ISI, an alien to the operations of foreign intelligence services against Pakistan. Starting from 1960s, when neighboring India’s counterpart of ISI, the Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), commonly know as RAW, started small- scale sabotage activities in border towns like Sialkot, Shakar Garh and parts of Balochistan, the ISI and other security agencies of Pakistan have been through a lot of encounters to prevent and counter anti-Pakistan sabotage activities by  India’s R&AW, former Soviet Union’s KGB, former communist Afghanistan’s Khaad, Iran’s former Savak, Israel’s Mosaad and even the Libyan MIF that carried out some sabotage operations after the hanging of the former Prime Minister of the country, Mr. Z. A. Bhutto, who was a very special friend of Libya’s Gaddafi.

In sharp contrast, the ISI or the country’s other security agencies never had a problem with the American CIA and in fact developed an amazing level of understanding and professional collaboration during the USSR’s invasion of neighboring Afghanistan. It appears that suddenly, after the demise of the Taliban government in Afghanistan and with the growing influence of India’s R&AW in Afghanistan, the CIA preferred to become hand in glove with R&AW in Afghanistan. Both R&AW and CIA are banking on the three trillion U.S. Dollars worth of drug money every year that is generated through heroin production and its subsequent sale across the world.

According to The Daily Mail’s investigations, certain wings of both the R&AW and CIA generate millions of dollars by providing or arranging safe passages for drug traffickers of Afghanistan and India at many points across the world. They generate these funds to carry out certain unapproved operations. It was the Pakistani Army and ISI that unfolded some proofs of the same in this direction after which the CIA got extremely annoyed and finally opted to launch motivated campaigns against Pakistan’s ISI and Pakistani Army with the generous collaboration of India’s R&AW.

A former official of the UN office on Drugs and Crimes (UNODC) says that despite the fact that the cultivation of poppy crop across Afghanistan has risen dramatically after the Taliban era and dozens of heroin production factories have been established across the country, the CIA never showed any interest in recommending to the U.S. government to launch a crackdown on heroin factories across Afghanistan that feed and finance militants and warlords.  The annoyance of CIA with Pakistani ISI and Army, according to some reports, peaked when an Indian defense official posted at the Indian Embassy in Kabul, who was a lynchpin between the Indian and Afghan drug operations, was killed in a suicide attack last year. The said Indian official was killed in an attack carried out, according to our investigations, by Afghan President’s brother and the world’s biggest heroin producer Izzat Ullah Wasifi after he developed doubts that the Indian officer was betraying him to America’s DEA (Drugs Enforcement Agency). And despite leads in this direction, R&AW convinced the CIA that the Indian officer was killed by attackers sent by ISI.

The recent blitzkrieg on Pakistan Army and the ISI are clear gifts of CIA. In the first attack, the Chairperson of the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Intelligence Diane Feinstein came up with a very ridiculous and rather childish ‘disclosure’ that U.S. Drones, named Predators, were flying from certain ISI air bases within Pakistan and that the USAF or U.S. Army had nothing to do with this activity. “Even a child knows that these Predators fly from the U.S. base in Bagram in Afghanistan and there are no air bases owned by the ISI as ISI is an intelligence agency that relies on Pakistan Air Force and its bases for any air space or avionic support. Coming out with such a ridiculous statement and that too, publicly, by the head of the U.S. Senate Intelligence committee is very surprising”, commented a senior defense analyst when contacted by The Daily Mail. He said this was nothing but a bid to generate feelings of hatred among Pakistanis against their own premier intelligence service, when the ISI is busy protecting the interests of the Pakistanis people.

In a second example, an ordinary U.S. journalist, working for the CIA-blessed U.S. daily The New York Times; named David E. Sanger, has come out with a book that can be described as nothing but a perfect piece of trash and a very mediocre work on intelligence. In the book, titled The Inheritance, Sanger claims, attributing to some highly classified files of the CIA and NSA that former Pakistani President Musharraf was playing a double game and making a double deal, on one side with America and on other side with the Taliban. This is not the start of the great Sanger-CIA trash but he claims a little down the road that the CIA had been bugging or tapping the telephones of top Pakistani Army Generals including the Chief of the Army Staff and head of the top spy agency, the ISI, and that during these tapped calls, it was revealed to the CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA) that top Generals of Pakistan were protecting the [Afghan] Taliban.

“This Sanger trash is nothing but a double bullshit with a cherry on top. First of all in the Pakistan Army establishment, the Generals and Commanders do not use the ordinary telephone lines or the cellular or satellite phones. The Armed forces have their own, secured and dedicated phone lines and most of the time, dedicated for person to person conversation and no one from the outside can, through any means, tape or bug these highly secured and sophisticated phone lines. Secondly, I must tell you that conversations of such a highly sensitive nature are never made on telephone lines anywhere in the world, a fact that makes this Sanger stuff a complete piece of trash and bullshit,” said a former Chief of  ISI, adding that in no intelligence set up across the world, such advanced warnings are issued to any ally, the way Sanger has narrated in his book while mentioning an advance warning by some ISI officials to Taliban before launching an attack on a school in  tribal areas of the country, where Pakistani Army and the ISI are battling militants.

According to certain Western intelligence observers and media commentators, if for a minute it is assumed that Sanger’s book was based on facts, this would raise alarming questions about the state of security and secrecy within CIA and NSA where a journalist like Sanger can lay his hands on information that supposedly cost the two organizations millions of dollars to attain and secure.

“In that case, the ISI’s complaints and Islamabad’s protests over the constant leakages of classified information to the media by U.S. intelligence authorities are one hundred percent accurate,” says David Smith, a senior journalist at a Washington-based news organization. Diplomatic analysts and intelligence observers say that it was surprising to see how that whenever it has something against Pakistan, the first thing the CIA does is to reach out straight away to the journalists of New York Times, Washington Post or CNN. How come the reporters of these media organizations get easy access to highly classified CIA reports in no time?

Taking exceptional note of the Sanger trash, former President Pervez Musharraf, for the first time after he left the Presidency, appeared before the media and brushed aside all the accusations made in the Sanger-CIA trash. He clearly stated that if the Pakistan Army and the ISI were not sincere in the global anti terror war, then it was a big intelligence lapse on part the U.S. spymasters who could not detect this alleged duplicity earlier. He also snubbed Sanger for his baseless accusations but said he would not press charges against the American journalist because the said journalist was that important and such mischief is not unusual. But Musharraf was clear about one thing: That there is a motivated campaign against Pakistan Army and ISI by U.S. quarters. He said the military and the ISI are custodians of Pakistan’s security and solidarity. He urged the Pakistani media to expose the hands behind this anti-ISI and anti-Pak Army campaign.

The Daily Mail is based in Islamabad and Beijing. Makhdoom Babar Sultan can be reached at macbaburAThotmail.com