Video: Al-Qaeda Does not Exist

Al Qaeda Doesn’t Exist is the forthcoming documentary by The Corbett Report. It interrogates the theory that Al Qaeda is a centrally-operated terrorist organization run by Osama Bin Laden that perpetrated the attacks of 9/11. The documentary looks at Al Qaeda’s roots, its ties to western intelligence agencies and the fictions that have been created to enhance its myth in the corporate-controlled media.

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. Read more of this post

Afghanistan: US dead end

Add to Google Buzz

by I. M. Mohsin

A host of confusing signals is coming out of the US which reflect concerns to ensure its security. President Barack Obama announced, as usual, a nicely-worded doctrine which would anger the rightwing while inducing the thinking Americans to ponder where they are headed. What they are reaping now is what was sown by the neocons and their accomplices, as George W. Bush appears to have been only a cover-up for the promotion of a certain lobby. The Americans themselves and all their well wishers must be feeling sore at how they were fooled to grant two terms to a guy who had no inkling of what was happening.

Now their new President has to tell them that it was ruinous for the US to talk like “you are either with us or against us”, as it may have suited a cowboy of yore but not an occupant of the White House. As things go awry in Afghanistan and regular blood-letting in Iraq by the status quo, the US commanders and their troops are feeling the heat all the way. What to talk of south, even north is acting hostile after about nine years of foreign occupation. In this scenario, it is even more demoralising for the US that the new British coalition is highly conscious of the poor progress of this war, as well as the history of the region.

Surely a visit by UK’s foreign and defence secretaries would have made the US miss Tony Blair, the ‘lapdog’ who allegedly coaxed up all controversial intelligence with the connivance of Italy’s Berlu-sconi to mislead the world on Bush’s gaffes.

The NATO troops in Afghanistan also appear to be fed up as all kinds of progress is drying up. Lately, their commander has emphatically called for the convening of Loya Jirga to reach an understanding among all parties to the war. This is what Karzai has been advocating which the US hesitates to support openly, while the Taliban have cold-shouldered it. The fact that even the Saudis support a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan is very important, more so as they have a great understanding with the US on important issues. So the troops deployed by the US must be under tremendous pressure due to the ‘enemy attacks’ all over that gets compounded by the uncertainty in their camp. Its net result is that generally the EU countries are unwilling to risk any more troops in Afghanistan. Chancellor Merkel’s Christian Democrats have suffered some electoral reverses which represent the despondency about their troops’ involvement in Afghanistan. The German President’s resignation would only boil the cauldron further. Read more of this post

Perverse role of US think-tanks

Asif Haroon Raja

There are 1777 think tanks based in USA. Likewise, large numbers are working in western countries. These think tanks as well as leading newspapers have remained focused on justifying invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq; to cover up crimes committed by US-NATO forces; to paint radical Muslims within targeted countries as human eating monsters and US forces as liberators. Rather than postulating how to defuse the explosive situation which is threatening world peace, their pens never dry up spewing out poison to further stoke fires of chaos and anarchy. Their write ups are based on tutored themes given by vested interests aimed at distorting facts, spreading disinformation, uncertainty and paranoia so as to keep the pot of war on terror boiling.

They portray the aggressors as virtuous free of any faults and victims of aggression as evil. Great majority of think tanks controlled by Jews are intensely prejudiced, irrational and imbalanced. They work on a given agenda to achieve sinister objectives. They have played a major role in demonizing Islam and Muslims and creating disharmony between faiths. 9/11 was over played to turn the guns of the west against the Muslims. Terrorism was made into a buzzword and every Muslim sporting a beard was suspected to be a terrorist and hounded. New laws were framed to humiliate and persecute Islamists. All freedom struggles waged by Muslims were categorized as terrorism. None discussed the root causes of terrorism or defined terrorism, or state terrorism objectively. Think tanks converted Al-Qaeda into a Frankenstein monster, which haunt policy makers in Washington, London, Tel Aviv and New Delhi. Like Osama bin Laden led Al-Qaeda, Mulla Omar led Afghan Taliban were also described as fiends. All these militants whom they now profusely hate were the blued-eyed of USA and western world in the 1980s since it were these holy warriors, now turned into terrorists, who bestowed the status of sole super power upon USA. Without their heroics USA could never ever have fulfilled its dream. As long as the US loved the Mujahideen they were loved by the free world. No sooner they began to hate them and became egotistical, unilateral and self righteous; it triggered anti-Americanism and the whole world began to hate USA for being selfish, untrustworthy and arrogant.

Judging from the track record and conduct of these jaundiced think tanks, it is quite evident that they are hell-bent to keep USA and Muslim world on a warpath so as to kill two birds with one stone. Clash of civilization between Christianity and Islam suit the agenda of Israel and India, both aspiring to become world powers. The Zionists had first pitched US led western world and Muslim world against Communism and after the fall of latter in 1991, Islam became their next target. Among the Muslims those with religious bent of mind and closer to religion were marked for annihilation with the help of secular Muslim leadership and backed by ultra liberal Muslims. American Jews played a key role in coloring the perceptions of US leaders. In order to turn American and western public hostile against Muslims, 9/11 was master minded by the Jews which changed the dynamics of the globe. Their grisly role has now been sufficiently exposed.

When George W. Bush decided to invade Afghanistan to avenge terrorist attacks allegedly master minded by Osama bin Laden and to ensure homeland security, India offered its full services and tried hard to convince Washington to tackle both Afghanistan and Pakistan simultaneously. Bush Administration ignored the counsel and preferred Pakistan over India because of its remarkable role in war in Afghanistan against Soviet forces in 1980s. As long as Washington trusted Pakistan and its premier institutions it made good progress. No sooner it started to mistrust Islamabad and indulged in undesirable ‘do more mantra’ under the influence of India and Israel and US think tanks, it lost direction and things began to go haywire and once the initiative slipped out of US hands it could not be regained.
Read more of this post

The media plays a significant role in manufacturing Islamophobia within western societies

The media plays a significant role in manufacturing Islamophobia within western societies by manipulating and shaping an individuals opinion on anything and everything.  It presents us with distorted images of Islam and that in turn conjures stereotypes and prejudice.

For people who are sceptical about the notion of ‘Islamophobia’, a study was conducted in the US where  the public were asked to write down, with as little thought and as much honesty as possible, all the words that come to mind when you think of the words “Islam” or Muslim”.

Most people gave an almost routine set of answers.  The names and events they thought of tended to be associated with violence, e.g., Osama Bin Laden, 9/11, Palestinian suicide bombers.  The ideas and practices were associated with oppression, e.g., Jihad, veiling, Islamic law. And the places were limited to the Middle East, e.g., Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran.  Of course some answers escaped the pattern, e.g., the Qur’an, pilgrimage to Mecca, Muhammad Ali, but these were relatively few.  When asked about their answers, many responded unfortunate as such associations may be, Muslims and Islam feature prominently in many of the world’s conflicts and injustices, and this they conclude says something about their religion.  Judging from the portrayals of Muslims and Islam in Western media, it’s hard to argue with them.

In September 2005, the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Postem, published 12 depictions of the Prophet Muhammad.  Awareness of the cartoons became widespread and a global protest soon grew, typified by peaceful gatherings of thousands of protestors in many places.  Unfortunately some Muslim’s reacted violently.

Islamophobia is even presented in popular films such as Hollywood blockbusters and children’s cartoons.  A report by the Islamic Human Rights Commission argues that films such as Aladdin and East is East have contributed to demonizing Muslims as dangerous and violent.  For example, in Aladdin, rather than presenting the Arab culture and Islamic religion in a positive way, it is associated with harsh punishments and oppressive practices.  In the British film East is East, a mixed raced Anglo-Pakistani family is presented struggling with their traditional background forced upon them by their father.  The representation of the Muslim husband is of a polygamous wife beater.


Sadly, media outlets consistently overlook the voices of moderation that come from the majority of Muslims.  When violence flared in 2006 over the controversial Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, very few of America’s frontline newspapers reported the condemnation of the violence issued immediately by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), one of the most important Islamic organisations In the US and only one of many that decried the attacks.  In another instance the year before, a Connecticut newspaper ran an editorial decrying the lack of public statements by Muslim leaders against the then recent terrorist attacks in London.  The state chapter of CAIR wrote back asking why the newspaper had not mentioned its own denunciation of the violence, which the group had sent the newspaper.  In fact, since this event, a great variety and number of Muslim leaders in the US and abroad condemned the attacks but received little coverage by the American media.

The media is always quick to stereotype Muslims as terrorists by linking the news to religion when Muslims have done something wrong.  But does the media link crimes carried out by Westerners to religion?

The answer is no.  The Columbine High School shooters religions were not disclosed, nor are the religions of any Western perpetrators.  The media believes that any Muslim who commits a crime is doing so in the name of Islam and therefore feels the need to disclose his religious views.

Because Muslims seldom appear in news reports or other media sources except as perpetrators of violence, supposedly in the name of Islam, many Westerners understandably conclude that all Muslim’s act from inherently religious motivations and that Islam is dangerous. Muslims become two-dimensional, existing only as Muslims, seemingly never sharing identities or interests with non-Muslims.  However, Westerners engage with Muslims in thousands of ways every day: a student and her classmates, a banker and his customer, a homeowner and her neighbours.  The globalised world we inhabit makes possible increasingly intimate connections between distant individuals with increasing speed.  So why, despite all this contact, do domestic news and entertainment sources seldom mention the terms “Muslim” or “Islam” except in the context of conflict, violence and bloodshed?? By: Ismail Farooki. Cambridge –England

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Kashmir, Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan

S.m. Hali

February 5th is being observed as Kashmir Solidarity Day, which is a yearly practice since 1990 as a day of protest against the unjust occupation of Kashmir. The day is marked with renewed firm resolve to continue the struggle for the achievement of the birthright of Kashmiris to self-determination through getting the valley liberated from the Indian yoke of tyranny. Kashmiris observe the solidarity day every year not only to renew their deep-rooted love and affection with Pakistan, but also to reiterate their commitment and dedication to their liberty from the Indian occupation. Kashmiris have been struggling since 1947 to secure their freedom, which was assured by the UN Resolutions; however, subsequent Indian governments have not only remained oblivious to the UN Resolutions, but also continued to subject the Kashmiris to their reign of terror. Pakistan’s endeavours to resolve the issue through dialogue have also been spurned by India.

The Palestinians too continue to suffer atrocities inflicted upon them by Israel, which was created unjustly after evicting the Palestinians from their territory in 1948. Since then the Palestinians have struggled to regain their homeland but have failed despite extreme sacrifice and war against Israel by its Arab neighbours to liberate Palestine.

Two other Muslim countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, which were occupied by the US/NATO forces during the 21st century, are close to being liberated from the tyranny of their invaders. Afghanistan was conquered by USA and its allies, following the 9/11 debacle. The US declared Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda group responsible for the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon and demanded the then Taliban regime in Afghanistan to hand over purported culprits for trial. Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader demanded proof of Osama’s complicity to the 9/11 attack. The Taliban query was interpreted as refusal and Afghanistan was subjected to one of the most ferocious attacks in history and occupied by US and its allies.

Iraq was attacked in 2003 by a US-led coalition force under the plea that Saddam Hussain’s regime possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD), which would pose a threat to the rest of the world. That is another aspect that the WMDs were never found during the seven years of occupation.

A number of conspiracy theories were floated to the rationale behind occupying Afghanistan and Iraq. In the case of Iraq, control of its oil reserves is the apparent reason for subjugating Iraq and installing a pliable and malleable regime there. The case of Afghanistan is slightly different. Michael Klare, author of the book Resource Wars, which has a major focus on the Caspian region, and Ahmad Rashid, Pakistani journalist and author of Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, opine that in the 10 years, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been a new great game between Russia, the United States, China, Iran, the European companies, for control of the new oil and gas resources that have been discovered in the Caspian Sea and in the Caucuses and Central Asia. They deduce that “because Central Asia is totally landlocked, distances are huge, and the US strategy has been essentially to keep, new oil pipelines not to be built through Russia or through Iran or China.”

They quote US government Energy Information fact sheet on Afghanistan dated December 2000, which reveals: “Afghanistan’s significance from an energy standpoint stems from its geographic position as a potential transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea. This potential includes proposed multi-billion dollar oil and gas export pipelines through Afghanistan” which is the shortest route to the Pakistani coastline on the Indian Ocean. To achieve this Afghanistan had to be conquered and a pliant regime installed there.

After tremendous bloodshed and financial losses, the US administration is now considering ways and means of exiting both Iraq and Afghanistan. President Obama, in his maiden State of the Union Address on January 27, presented strategies for reviving the sick economy of USA. What he failed to mention, but has been disclosed by the Information Clearing House Newsletter of January 31, 2010 that a number of Iraqis slaughtered since the US invaded Iraq so far is “1,366,350”, while the number of US military personnel sacrificed (officially acknowledged) In America’s War on Iraq is: 4,692. On the other hand, the number of International Occupation Force Troops sacrificed in Afghanistan is 1,611, while the civilian casualties in Afghanistan since 9/11 range between 11,760 and 31,357. To top it all, the cost of war in Iraq and Afghanistan is a whopping $955,465,013,902. No wonder plans for the egress of the US and other international forces from Afghanistan and Iraq are underway.

General Viktor Yermakov, the Commander of Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s, while talking to CNN after the proposed troop surge in Afghanistan, commented that the “US is repeating the Soviet blunder of adding more troops in Afghanistan.” He stated that at the height of the Soviet-Afghan War, there were 300,000 Soviet troops deployed in Afghanistan, out of which 15,000 Soviets were killed, 469,685 got wounded while 500 are still missing. What he did not say was that the invasion contributed to the demise of USSR.

It is ironical that during the London Conference, General Stanley McChrystal’s despite being a fighting general, pronouncement that “there’s been enough fighting,” and Robert Gates, the US secretary of defence, proclamation: “The Taliban…are part of the political fabric of Afghanistan,” are being used to bolster Hamid Karzai’s plea that negotiations must be opened with the Taliban. The London Conference went a step ahead and approved a multi-million integration fund to lure the Taliban fighters to join the political mainstream.

We hope and pray that peace returns to Iraq and Afghanistan, but what a pity that Kashmir and Palestine continue to bleed since they neither have oil nor are situated on the oil-gas trade route. May their predicament be over and the simmering trauma gets resolved at an early date.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Waging 10 year war on Taliban then making peace with same Taliban!

Stanley McChrystal, the senior US general in Afghanistan, has told the Financial Times he believes a negotiated settlement would be the right way to end the Afghan conflict. His comments have fuelled a debate on the merits of talking to the Taliban.

Can negotiations end the war?

The appeal of dialogue to end the Afghan conflict has a whiff of alchemy about it: great in theory but extremely difficult in practice. The biggest problem may be that the Taliban feel they are winning. US troop deaths more than doubled in 2009. Gen McChrystal hopes his surge of 30,000 troops will convince his opponents they are better off negotiating but admits that Taliban attacks are likely to spike. “They have got to create the perception that Afghanistan’s on fire,” he told the Financial Times. With Nato allies already eyeing the exit, the Taliban may believe their long-term goal of regaining power in Kabul is within their grasp.

Who could help facilitate dialogue?

Pakistan played midwife at the birth of the Taliban and, along with Saudi Arabia, was one of only three countries to recognise the movement when it ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. Reports of efforts by Islamabad and Riyadh to broker talks have surfaced repeatedly. Both are US allies that would use their leverage over any peace process to expand their influence in Washington. Pakistan, in particular, would want to be rewarded with greater backing in its competition with India.

How would talks happen?

Even contacting the Taliban is a complex process involving intermediaries bearing scraps of paper: the leaders shun telephones that could be used to trace their location. Abdul Salam Zaeef, a former Taliban ambassador who lives in Kabul, helps facilitate contacts with the Taliban’s leaders, but organising face-to-face talks would be complex. Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates, which also recognised the Taliban government when it was in power, might be the most plausible venues for initial meetings between low-level representatives.

Although many insurgents loosely pledge allegiance to Mullah Mohammed Omar, the movement’s founder and spiritual head, he was a renowned recluse even before fleeing the 2001 US invasion. Distinguishing key Taliban decision-makers from mid-level commanders who control only small groups of fighters would be tricky.

So what’s the problem?

Too many to list. It is hard to see Mr Omar, who once ruled Afghanistan as emir of an austere theocracy, accepting a role under the current western-style constitution. Although the Taliban has recently stressed it does not pose an international threat, its leaders are conscious of the ire they earned in the west for allowing Osama bin Laden, the head of al-Qaeda, to organise the September 11 2001 attacks from Afghan soil. Mistrust on all sides runs deep.

What about other insurgent leaders?

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who leads the insurgency in several eastern provinces, is most likely to cut a deal. A former prime minister, he founded a party called Hezb-e-Islami, a faction of which already shares power in Kabul. A father-and-son team from the Haqqani family who run a fiefdom straddling the Pakistan border are less biddable.

Can Taliban fighters simply be bribed?

Maybe. Western countries gathering in London for a conference on Thursday will pledge funds for a scheme outlined by Hamid Karzai, the president, to try to lure Taliban foot soldiers with job offers. Details remain sketchy. Insurgents may simply accept the incentives then return to the fight. The central problem remains: the Taliban may simply believe it can outlast the west. (Q&A: How do you get the Taliban to negotiate By Matthew Green in Kandahar )

“War on Terror” as a Cover for US Terrorism

“Dissent is no longer the duty of the engaged citizen but is becoming an act of terrorism ” – Chris Hedges

By Paul J | It’s ironic. It’s hypocritical. It’s a fraud. The “war on terrorism” branded by America is a propaganda cover for the worst terrorists in the world.

What was the invasion and occupation of Iraq but an act of terrorism? Everyone now knows that the faux war was born of a fraud. The deception had no legitimate purpose except to terrorize countries that (a) produce oil, (b) harbour Al-Qaeda or (c) threaten Israel.

Even the invasion of Afghanistan, considered a legitimate response to 9/11, could have been avoided. The Taliban appropriately asked the US to provide evidence of Osama bin Laden’s complicity in the 9/11 affair before deporting him.

Instead, we attacked Afghanistan to the cheers of terrorizing avengers. “We’ll show you what we do to those who terrorize America!” was the mantra. The USA is still terrorizing Afghanistan, thereby increasing Al-Qaeda cells.

The icing on the spread-fear cake has involved the USA terrorizing Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Not only are the countries America bombs terrorized. Every other country that might disobey our commands is threatened and made to fear for its existence.

Human life outside America and its stooges isn’t worth a tinker’s damn to terrorist America. Some 567,000 Iraqi children under the age of five died from American sanctions on Iraq. On 60 minutes in 1996, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said: “We think the price is worth it.”

As of January 2010 and since the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, 1,366,350 Iraqi lives have been lost to terrorist slaughterers. “Never mind,” you say? “The price is worth it. Beside, they’re only Muslims who want to multiply and take over the world.”

Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram and rendition programmes have been nothing but terrorizing to plant fear in the hearts and minds of any Arab or Muslim with negative feelings toward America.

Something about being a terrorist of “lesser breeds” tends to become a mindset that disregards national identities. Even Americans can become the objects of American terrorists. American Arabs and Muslims have been the objects of terrorism ever since 9/11.

According to Chris Hedges, “An Arab American, Syed Fahad Hashmi, made provocative statements, including calling America “the biggest terrorist in the world”. That led to his arrest and prosecution on trumped up charges, in much the same way that Professor Sami al-Aryan lost his job and freedom for being an outspoken critic of US and Israeli policy.

Hedges relates the terrorizing effect of these prosecutions even of American citizens. “The state,” he says, “can detain and prosecute people not for what they have done, or even for what they are planning to do, but for holding religious or political beliefs that the state deems seditious. The first of those targeted have been observant Muslims, but they will not be the last.

Chris Floyd points to incidents in countless towns and villages across America’s terror war fronts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Yemen where a multitude of grieving, angry Iraqis are further embittered against the American occupation by America’s terrorist killings.

“You want to stop the ‘radicalization’ of young Muslims? Chris asks. “It’s simple: stop killing innocent Muslims in wars of domination all over the world. Stop running ‘covert ops’ in every nation of the world (as Obama’s ‘special envoy’ Richard Holbrooke admitted last week) – murders, kidnappings, corruption and deception that make a howling mockery of the very ‘civilized values’ these wars and ops purport to defend.”

If America wants to stop terrorism, it needs to stop terrorizing the world.


America on the road to perdition

Mohammad Jamil | For quite some time, Americans have been earning less and spending more, producing less and consuming more, with the result that both America and Americans have become technically bankrupt. In view of recession coupled with fiscal crisis, the entire balance of global economic power could shift, since economic strength is basic to remain predominantly military power. It is perhaps in this backdrop that two prominent authors Nick Turse and Tom Engelhardt wrote an article under the caption ‘A fight against the odds’ published in Asia Time Online.

The concluding sentence of the article reads: “The fact is: Al Qaeda is not an apocalyptic threat. Its partisans can cause damage, but only Americans can bring down this country”. They have given details of America’s military might – its troops, reserves and intelligence personnel, well trained special operations and its arsenal comprising tanks, planes, missiles, aircraft carriers and a stock of nukes. They reckon that Al Qaeda’s ‘shock troops’ add up to perhaps 2100 fighters who have access to rocket-propelled grenades, small arms of various sorts, the materials for making deadly roadside bombs, car bombs, and of course ‘underwear bombs’. The authors ridicule America’s military might in these words: “After the better part of a decade of conflict, the US has spent trillions of taxpayer dollars on bullets and bombs, soldiers and drones. It has waged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have yet to end; launched strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia; dispatched special ops troops to those nations and others, like the Philippines, and built or expanded hundreds of new bases all over the world. Yet Osama bin Laden remains at large and Al Qaeda continues to target and kill Americans”. Al Qaeda was formed when the Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan, and Osama bin Laden’s demand was that American forces should withdraw its forces from Saudi Arabia and the Middle East., and he was critical of America for giving unqualified support to Israel. Anyhow, he was the man who was eulogized by the US and the West, and through western media he was presented as a symbol who left his luxurious life for the same of jihad. In other words, he was America’s find, and Pakistan should not be blamed for his actions. Read more of this post

Talibanization: It’s all about Gwadar Port & Transit Trade Route

Do you think that Muslims were involved in the 9/11 terrorist attacks on WTC that took 3,200 lives on American soils?  If it so, then newspapers of 2001 carried different story, saying that all the pilots who collided their aircrafts with the New York building and Pentagon were from Arabs descent.  According to US think tanks and research centers, some of the youth who underwent a regular training of flying with a view to carry out planned terrorism, were Arabs and remaining came from Egypt. They were all from affluent and highly educated families. It is also an established fact that there was not a single Afghan involved in this terrorist act. Then, why did US attack Afghanistan?

However, based on the intelligence intercept reports that indicated Osama bin Laden’s presence (accused of providing financial support to the terrorist plot) in the mountainous areas inside Afghanistan, the US & NATO troops invaded the region in 2001. As the invasion was very controversial, therefore, US started rationalizing by blowing the theme of extremism and Talibanization. In fact, the sole objective of the US was not to apprehend Osama bin Laden or toppling of Taliban rule in Afghanistan. It was rather the game of possessing the enormous natural resources of Central Asian Republics as well controlling the transit trade routes.

Now, after eight years of the invasion, it has become increasingly clear that there was a subtle link between the 9/11 terrorist attack and taking over of natural riches of CARs.

Pakistan Army is presently engaged in massive operations in the north-west of the country where Talibans have challenged the writ of the Government.  In order to stop possible suicide bombing, the security has been put on “high alert” in the country.  When is this war going to end?  It is early to say anything, nevertheless, the conflict started in June 2002, when security forces were targeted in the name of backwardness of the Balochistan province.  The insurgent situation escalated when the Phase-1 of Gwadar project was completed in 2005, and a number of Chinese Engineers were made subject of attacks by the Baloch insurgents who see their interest in the port as a threat to their survival.  The situation became worst when the Chinese Premier was not allowed to visit Gwadar for opening ceremony of the Seaport, due to security reasons.  But, our media and political analysts were not prepared to reveal the truth that the whole issue hinges on the development of Gwadar deep
Seaport and transit trade route.

Perhaps, the unrest could have been restricted to Balochistan only, but KKH-II project ignited the whole frontier province as well.  Here, the insurgency started by razing girls’ schools in the name of enforcement of Shariah in Bajaur, Malakand, Swat and adjoining tribal areas, when China signed MoU in 2004 for further expansion and upgrading of the existing Karakoram highway that links Gilgit to Kohat via Chitral, Dir, Swat connecting Gwadar to Western China.  The KKH trade route agreement alarmed many countries.  US viewed the Highway project as alarming for its endeavours in exploiting the riches of CARs.  India considered it as a dangerous development for its security.  The Kashgar-Gwadar trade route affected the trade and economic interest of neighboring states of the region.  Side by side, China started laying rail-link from Shanghai to Kashgar. In order to deny Chinese access to Gwadar and to stop Pakistan from exploiting economic benefit, the theme of provincial rights and backwardness proved quite successful.

However, the same strategy could hold the grounds in the tribal areas and NWFP.  Therefore, keeping in view the environment of the area and emotional attachment of the people with the Islam, the propaganda theme regarding the presence of Osama bin Laden & al Qaeda leadership was blown out of proportion.

The western media was already showing concern regarding militants’ infiltration to orchestrate and launch cross-border attacks from their sanctuaries on Pakistani soil.  Similarly, Afghan President Hamid Karzai accused Pakistan of alleged relationship between ISI agency and the militants.  Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at Pentagon, US Gen. David Petraeus, commander Central Command, US think tanks and media cartels, questioned the alleged relationship between ISI and the militant Talibans.

The tug of war to reach the natural resources of CARs is generally called as “new great game” with Iran, USA and Russia as old players in the game.  Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that India would attempt to create hurdles and would ensure that the port does not become hub port.  There is strong evidence of Indian support in planning, commissioning and preparing acts of terrorism in Balochistan through setting up of 26 centres of terrorism (consulates) along the western border in Afghanistan.  Reliable sources have revealed that explosives were brought in by Indian Border Roads Organisation (BRO) under the garb of “reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts” in Afghanistan through Iran to be used for sabotage acts against Balochistan.

The suicide bombing inside Pakistan has been a source of concern throughout the world.  According to US and NATO Commanders, the next attacks on the US will likely to originate from Pakistan’s tribal belt.  They also warned that Pakistan’s nuclear assets may fall in the hands of Islamic extremists.  The terrorists are targeting Pakistan Army, ISI and law enforcing authorities.  There are incidents where soldiers’ bodies were mutilated.  But Pakistan Army reacted with constraint due to collateral damage.  In this way, Pakistan security forces were attacked on two fronts: on the one side, they were confronted with the suicide bomber inside the country and on the other hand, they were attacked by the Taliban in the tribal areas.  Even then, the “Aristotles” sitting in the media circles are terming it “Pashtun’s revenge”.  However, it is far away from reality.  In fact, trained militants from regular Israel and India forces duly supported by US, are fighting against Pakistan Army in the tribal area & Swat region.  The situation might have aggravated, if Pakistan Army had not launched military operation in these areas.  The Government “peace initiatives & deals” were aimed to bring peace in the area.  But the leaders and operational commanders of Talibans, pursuing US & India agenda were not interested in peace as well as Nazim-i-Adil Regulation.

Now, let us see other facet of the topic.  India’s objective is to prevent Pakistan from offering safe transit routes to the Central Asian Republics.    It is interesting to note a tit for tat response by Indians on the issue of the establishment of Port.  When the Chinese began the Gwadar port, the Indians began to help Iranians construct the Chabahar port next door.  The Chabahar port ironically also located in the Baloch part of Iran, will be accessible for Indian imports and exports, with road links to Afghanistan and Central Asia. India is helping build a 200-kilometre road that will connect Chabahar with Afghanistan.  The US financed Ring Road connects Kabul to Iranian port of Chabahar through Herat.   India has successfully completed the work of Zaranj-Delaram highway and it will connect India with Central Asia countries.  It links Zaranj, which lies on Afghanistan’s border with Iran, to Delaram, situated on the “garland highway”. The garland highway links Kabul, Kandahar, Herat, Mazar-e-Sharif and Kunduz.

China has developed a new security concept based on “Soft power” that seeks to assure China’s economic development.  However, US considers China as a future rival and expresses concern over China’s growing military might.  Despite changes in the international situation, China-Pakistan friendship has remained strong and steadfast.  China has helped Pakistan in developing its economy.  Chinese assistance has been invaluable in areas as diverse as construction of nuclear power plants, dams, roads and industrial, Gwadar port on Pakistan’s Arabian Sea coast.  Pakistan too can help in China’s growth in opening energy supplies from the Gulf to China.  If China can lay hands on the resources of CARs, then China can achieve its economic goals within five years instead of planned 25 years.

The trade prospects with China are envisaged to evolve along with the construction of the port.  It is expected that China’s use of the Gwadar port for exports originating from the western region will provide her preferred option. Thus, it may be visualized that the Gwadar port will be an integral part of China’s Foreign Trade route in future.  The existing Karakoram highway already connects western China to Pakistan through Gilgit-Chitral-Dir-Swat to Kohat and then linking to Indus Highway.  With further expansion and upgrading of this traffic artery and proposed linkages to Gwadar via planned Kohat tunnel, Tank, DI Khan, Taunsa, DG Khan, Rajanpur, Kashmore, Sikarpur, Ratodero, Khuzdar.  M-6 Motorway linking D G Khan with Ratodero and M-8 Motorway linking Ratodero with Gwadar.   It shall make it the shortest and viable route connecting Gwadar to Western China.  M-6 Motorway linking D G Khan with Ratodero and M-8 Motorway linking Ratodero with Gwadar.

The most important point is that there is no river bridge on this route.  This developmental plan is between two independent states.  It is not a conspiracy against anybody, then why the region has become tense and volatile.

China too is interested in having its share in the new Silk roads.  China will pay for the transit route.

Gwadar port emerges as a place of great strategic value, giving tremendous boost to Pakistan’s economy as well uplifts the standard of common people of the area.  This is not acceptable to US, India and other countries.  Just see, no sooner Pakistan Army has initiated a military operation to flush out Talibans from the tribal areas, an increase in the volume of propaganda targeting nuclear assets has been observed in the press.

The miscreants who have been carrying out suicide bombing, razing girls schools, maiming the opponents and killing innocent childrens, are being called as ‘Talibanization”.  However, Taliban was created by US with the view to secure the trade route from Qandhar to Herat and CARs.  In this creation, almost 75 per cent of Soviet sponsored Afghan Army personnel and Khalq & Parcham party were included.  Amongst, was the then Defence Minister of Najeeb Government, Gen. Shahnawaz Tani.  Should Gen Tani be called as Taliban?  It was part of the planned strategy of US to defame Islam.  Similarly, now Talibans are being made to fight against Pakistan Army.  In 1994, it was securing trade route, and even today, the same trade route is the bone of contention.  Additionally, Gwadar Port has added many new dimensions in intensifying the conflict.

How long this process will take?  The tribal areas will continue to remain battlefield.  During swat operation, the arrest of Afghan citizens is a proof that Afghan warlords sitting in Afghanistan, are controlling the insurgency in Pakistan.  They are providing arms and ammunition to the insurgent militants.  It is very clear that US and NATO forces are playing games after being denied access to the trade route.  The US investment amounting to billions of dollars has not reaped profitable results.  The trade through Iranian port of Chabahar is conditioned to the peace of the area.  The unrest is due to wrong policies of US which has made favourable conditions for the drug barons supported by Afghan warlords and of course US/NATO commanders.

The volatile situation has restricted neighboring countries to extract benefits from the trade route.  The government of Pakistan and its people are suffering due to the non-operationalization of the trade route.  The only option left is to find a new trade route to fulfill the growing energy requirements of the country. Amid the turbulence in Afghanistan, alternate corridors is the only option left to fulfill the growing energy requirements of the country, allowing Central Asia fresh breath to develop trade in several directions.  In fact, the trade route is already in place.  US and China are forced to use this route, despite of difference in opinion. If you see the map closely, you will find a small corridor Wakkan Valley (Afghanistan) stretching in between Pakistan and Tajikistan and later joining Western China in Kasghar.  There is a vast pass at “Qila Panjah” in Afghanistan.. Here the distance of Pakistan with Tajikistan is just 50 KM.

The road connecting Kohat tunnel with Swat and Dir is called KKH phase-II project.  If Chitral is connected to Tajikistan via “Qila Panjah” (Afghanistan) linking to KKH till Kashgar (China).  Then, one trade route can emerge and China, US Russia can benefit from this trade route.  An elaborated network of infrastructure being put in place across Pakistan and the improvement in Korakoram Highway, would provide China the shortest possible access to the Middle East and other world markets through Gwadar Port.   The traditional route of Turkmenistan to Tajikistan via Uzbekistan already exists since Soviet Union era.  In this way, Kasghar-Gwadar trade route will not be restricted to China only.  Rather, will prove beneficial for the rest of the world by connecting it with the CARs.  It will become necessity for the big powers to restore peace in NWFP and tribal Areas.  Afghanistan will also be getting transit fee for the route, but whether India will accept this unique trade route or not.  Time will tell. Khalid Khokhar

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: