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

The Unwinnable War in Afghanistan

Saving face in unwinnable war

Sinking in debt and no closer to victory, heads may roll as the U.S. and NATO wrap up their pointless Afghan adventure

American soldiers search for caves concealing weapons in eastern Afghanistan. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

By ERIC MARGOLIS, QMI AGENCY

Fire-breathing U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal and his Special Forces “mafia” were supposed to crush Afghan resistance to western occupation. But McChrystal was fired after rude remarks from his staff about the White House.

A more cerebral and political general, David Petraeus, replaced McChrystal. Petraeus managed to temporarily suppress resistance in Iraq.

Last week, the usually cautious Petraeus vowed from Kabul to “win” the Afghan War, which has cost the U.S. nearly $300 billion to date and 1,000 dead. The problem: No one can define what winning really means. Each time the U.S. reinforces, Afghan resistance grows stronger.

Afghanistan is America’s longest-running conflict.

The escalating war now costs U.S. taxpayers $17 billion monthly. President Barack Obama’s Afghan “surge” of 30,000 more troops will cost another $30 billion.

The Afghan and Iraq wars — at a cost of $1 trillion — are being waged on borrowed money when the U.S. is drowning in $13.1 trillion in debt.

America has become addicted to debt and war.

By 2011, Canadians will have spent an estimated $18.1 billion on Afghanistan, $1,500 per household.

The U.S. Congress, which alone can declare and fund war, shamefully allowed U.S. presidents George W. Bush and Obama to usurp this power. A majority of Americans now oppose this imperial misadventure. Though politicians fear opposing the war lest they be accused of “betraying our soldiers,” dissent is breaking into the open.

Last week, Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele let the cat out of the bag, admitting the Afghan war was not winnable. War-loving Republicans erupted in rage, all but accusing Steele of high treason. Many of Steele’s most hawkish Republican critics had, like Bush and Dick Cheney, dodged real military service during the Vietnam War.

Republicans (I used to be one) blasted McChrystal’s sensible policy of trying to lessen Afghan civilian casualties from U.S. bombing and shelling. There is growing anti-western fury in Afghanistan and Pakistan over mounting civilian deaths.

By clamouring for more aggressive attacks that endanger Afghan civilians and strengthen Taliban, Republicans again sadly demonstrate they have become the party and voice of America’s dim and ignorant.

Obama claimed he was expanding the Afghan War to fight al-Qaida. Yet the Pentagon estimates there are no more than a handful of al-Qaida small-fry left in Afghanistan.

Obama owes Americans the truth about Afghanistan.

After nine years of war, the immense military might of the U.S., its dragooned NATO allies, and armies of mercenaries have been unable to defeat resistance to western occupation or create a popular, legitimate government in Kabul. Drug production has reached new heights.

As the United States feted freedom from a foreign oppressor on July 4, its professional soldiers were using every sort of weapon in Afghanistan, from heavy bombers to tanks, armoured vehicles, helicopter gunships, fleets of drones, heavy artillery, cluster bombs and an arsenal of hi-tech gear.

In spite of this might, bands of outnumbered Pashtun tribesmen and farmers, armed only with small arms, determination and limitless courage, have fought the West’s war machine to a standstill and now have it on the strategic defensive. Read more of this post

US nonsense on Pak nuclear issue


By Dr. Shireen M Mazari

Nothing can be as demeaning as Prime Minister Gilani’s declaration that Pakistan would abide by “US sanctions on Iran.” While UN sanctions under Chapter VII are obligatory for all member states, why should Gilani lay the country prostrate before the US? And this at a time when we are being cornered on all fronts, especially the nuclear, by this “ally”!

China and Pakistan have been cooperating in the field of civilian nuclear technology for many years now and since China became a member of the IAEA all the civilian reactors given by China have been subject to IAEA safeguards. Unlike in the case of India, after the Indo-US nuclear deal, Pakistan continues to go by the normal safeguards agreement for Non-NPT states. In India’s case it may be recalled, the US managed to get an India-specific safeguards agreement from the IAEA for those reactors that the US will either be providing fuel for or helping construct. Moreover, it is India that will decide which reactors will come under these loose safeguards and according to a unique provision – not present in any other IAEA safeguard model – India can opt out of the safeguards when it sees fit! The US also got country-specific export exceptions for India from the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG), which goes contrary to not only the NPT but also the NSG’s own guidelines. Ironically, the NSG first came into being in 1975 as a reaction to the 1974 Indian nuclear test where the explosive device used plutonium from a Canadian-supplied reactor. Even at that time, Canada irrationally chose to penalise Pakistan by immediately withdrawing aid to the KANUPP reactor despite it being under IAEA safeguards.

Now once again, the US is threatening to victimise Pakistan and try and sabotage the civilian nuclear deal with China – which is similar to and a continuation of past cooperation under IAEA scrutiny. The chosen forum for the present pressure on Pakistan is the upcoming NSG meeting in New Zealand. However, both China and Pakistan need to remember that the NSG is merely a ‘club’ of suppliers of nuclear technology where membership is by choice and there is nothing internationally and legally binding with regard to its decisions. So Pakistan and China are under no obligation to give in to unreasonable country-specific demands targeting Pakistan’s civilian nuclear programme – after all, China’s membership of the NSG is voluntary and while it can explain its nuclear cooperation with Pakistan, it is under no compulsion to abandon it at the behest of the NSG. Another Muslim state, Iran, is also going to be targeted at the New Zealand NSG meeting. Read more of this post

USA, Israel and India are a pestilence upon the world

Add to Google Buzz

by Asif Haroon Raja

In violation to international law, Bush administration heavy with neo-cons chalked out a policy in 2002 of unilateralism, shock and awe and pre-emption against a state whenever the US felt that its strategic interests were being harmed.

Threat perception also included non-state actors like Al-Qaeda or states harboring or assisting stateless elements. This policy framework got a shot in the arm when Al-Qaeda started to hurl threats that it would strike at US targets within or outside USA whenever opportunity came its way. Strategy of pre-emption was conceived with eye on Iraq and its oilfields and to retain US unchallenged uni-polarism.

Accordingly false story of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was fabricated and drummed up with full vigor. In order to justify the invasion, people of America and western world were frightened into believing that WMD had to be instantly taken control of before those could be used against western interests. None questioned Bush as to why he was risking the lives of American troops and coalition forces when he knew that the enemy was linked with Al-Qaeda and had WMD.

While the sole super power is consuming all its energies to browbeat outfits like al-Qaeda and Taliban for nearly 9 years, and trying to destabilize third world countries like Pakistan and Iran at the cost of its economy, prestige and credibility, Russia and China are busy expanding their influence globally and consolidating their economic gains. China has achieved astounding economic growth despite global recession and is modernizing its armed forces at a fast rate.

Russia too is feverishly engaged in reconstructing its armed forces after it achieved economic recovery. As a consequence, the two countries have surged ahead in the economic race and have also established their credibility on sound footing.

Economically hard pressed and debt ridden countries in particular have begun to veer towards China and Russia and are distancing from untrustworthy America, known for ditching its allies and too obsessed with self interests. Other reasons of US loss of face and credibility are its habit of applying sanctions upon states refusing to tow its line, offering aid on stringent conditions, influencing IMF and World Bank to make the countries seeking loans debt ridden for life, indulging in secret wars to destabilize regimes or bringing a regime change, stealing resources, over dependence on Israel and India, imposing self subscribed democracy in Muslim countries and pursuing dual-faced policies.

The US has no well defined and sound exit strategy from Afghanistan. It relies on force and high hopes which are wishful. The US military planners are still very optimistic that with two troop surges they will be able to sufficiently weaken the Taliban’s fighting potential and force them to come to the negotiating table. They fantasize that Karzai regime which is hated by Afghans would be able to win back majority of Taliban through reintegration and reconciliation policy. It is preposterous and hyperbolic and far from ground realities. On one hand the US invite Taliban to join puppet regime and on the other vicious attacks are launched against them in towns and cities inhabited by peace loving civilians who are forced to act as human shields by the ones trying to throw out occupiers as well as by the attackers who use them as informers and guides. It is the unarmed civilians who receive the major brunt of the crossfire and are the worst sufferers. It is they who are accused by the Taliban as American spies and by the latter as collaborators. Pashtun Afghans hate occupation forces and respect the Taliban waging a Jihad against aggressors who have made their lives miserable.

Reasons which compelled Obama to take the bitter decision to quit Afghanistan were mounting opposition against futile war on terror which had no ending, demand for return of forces by home audience and western countries, sinking morale of coalition troops, corrupt and inept Karzai regime, utterly weak position of ANA and Afghan police, melting economy of USA with little hope of recovery, ever increasing expenses of war in two theatres and debt liabilities crossing over $3 trillions, national debt jumping to $ 13 trillion, rising anti-Americanism, challenges posed by assertive Russia and China, growing power of Taliban, al-Qaeda becoming a global threat. His much touted healthcare has come under clouds due to financial constraints while his efforts to revitalize financial system, enfeebled by global recession have also been hampered by Republicans. Read more of this post

The Truth About September 11th From 23 Informative Websites

Add to Google Buzz

Don’t You Want To Know The Real Truth About What Happened On September 11th?

Lovearth.net Has Put Together 23 Informative Websites
To Help You Educate Yourself About This “War On Terror”

1) Exposing The NORAD Wag The 911 Window Dressing Tale
Using NORAD’s Own Press Release And Fifth Grade Math

Published January 8, 2003
http://www.StandDown.net

2) The Most Comprehensive Minute By Minute Timeline On 911
Published September 9, 2002
http://www.911Timeline.net

3) My Country Right Or Wrong – Questioning September 11th
Published October 22, 2001
http://www.MyCountryRightOrWrong.net

4) More Than 500 Great Articles About 911 From Around The World
Online since September 13, 2001
http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net

5) Tuesday, September 11, 2001, And The Three Top Sins Of The Universe
Published February 9, 2002
http://www.September112001.net

6) Audios, Videos, Photographs, Polls, Petition And News Archive
http://www.9112001.net

7) Bin Laden Family Money & Bush 41 & 43 Conflict Of War Profit Interesthttp://www.CarlyleGroup.net

8) The History Of Oil And War – The U. S. And British Oil Imperialismhttp://www.OilCompanies.net

9) The Unelected Commander In Thief – Articles, Photos, Books And Polls
http://www.GeorgeWalkerBush.net

10) How The USA PATRIOT Act Subverts 6 Amendments Of The Bill Of Rights
http://www.BillOfRights.net

11) The USA PATRIOT Act Search Law Will Provoke 4th Amendment Challenge
http://www.SneakAndPeek.net

12) Preserving Freedom By Wholesale Abrogation Of Our Civil Liberties?
http://www.Police-State.net

13) How The Fourth Estate Have Become Corporate Lap Dog Stenographers
http://www.FreedomOfThePress.net

14) Book Banning In United States Is Alive And Well In The 21st Century
http://www.Freedom-Of-Speech.net

15) The U.S. Is Unilaterally Violating Numerous International Treaties
http://www.UnitedStatesGovernment.net

16) eMail Addresses Of All 535 Congress Members Plus The V.P. And Bush
http://www.eMailCongress.net

17) Articles On The Perversity Of War And How To Bring Peace On Earth
http://www.PeaceOnEarth.net

18) Ashcroft Covers Up The Spirit Of Justice And Majesty Of Law Statues
http://www.Fascistic.net

19) Why Bush Is Addicted To Perpetual War – Lessons Learned From Daddy
http://www.Orwellian.net

20) Bush’s Bay Of Piglets – Many Articles On The Failed Venezuelan Coup
http://www.Imperialist.net

21) Latest EcoHumanePolitical News – Thousands Of Archived Articles
http://www.Earths.net

22) An Extensive Archive Of The Top EcoHumanePolitical Articles
http://www.EarthsNews.net

23) Connecting Through 1000+ EcoHumanePolitical Top Level Websites
With Our New Search Engine You Can Find Thousands Of Archived Articles
http://www.Lovearth.net

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

Framing Pakistan

Add to Google Buzz

How the pro-Israel media enables India’s surrogate warfare

According to Duff, “The Pakistani Taliban is in close cooperation with, supplied, financed, armed and trained by Israel and India to attack Pakistan.”

By Maidhc Ó Cathail

In its bitter rivalry with India, Pakistan is at a fatal disadvantage. Unlike its South Asian neighbour, Islamabad lacks an ally with considerable influence over American mainstream media.

The latest example of US media complicity with the Indo-Israeli alliance came in the aftermath of the much-hyped Times Square “car-bomb” incident. Typical of the media orgy of Pakistan-bashing that followed the discovery of an SUV packed with 250 pounds of non-explosive fertilizer was a piece written by Newsweek’s Indian-born editor, Fareed Zakaria, in which he brands Pakistan as “a terrorist hothouse.”

“For a wannabe terrorist shopping for help, Pakistan is a supermarket,” writes Zakaria. “There are dozens of jihadi organizations: Jaish-e-Muhammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Al Qaeda, Jalaluddin and Siraj Haqqani’s network, Tehrik-e-Taliban, and the list goes on. Some of the major ones, like the Kashmiri separatist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, operate openly via front groups throughout the country. But none seem to have any difficulty getting money and weapons.”

Zakaria is in no doubt about who’s to blame. It’s also worth noting that Fareed Zakaria is a Harvard protégé of Stanley Hoffman, a Jewish Zionist professor of international relations, and Samuel Huntington, who popularized the Clash of Civilizations thesis originated by Bernard Lewis, a Jewish Zionist professor emeritus at Princeton. Like Hoffman and Lewis, Zakaria supported the Israeli–induced 2003 invasion of Iraq.

“From its founding, the Pakistani government has supported and encouraged jihadi groups, creating an atmosphere that has allowed them to flourish,” claims the CNN pundit.

To back up his assertions, Zakaria cites no less an authority that Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States. In Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military, which Zakaria considers a “brilliant history,” Husain Haqqani claims that support for jihad has been “a consistent policy of the state.”

Case closed for the prosecution? Perhaps not.

The Pakistani diplomat’s credibility as an objective critic of jihadism is undermined somewhat by his intimate ties to the Israel-centric neoconservative network. A former fellow at the Likudnik Hudson Institute, Haqqani co-chaired Hudson’s Project on Islam and Democracy. Its director, Hillel Fradkin, was a Project for a New American Century signatory to a 2002 letter to George W. Bush equating Yasser Arafat with Osama Bin Laden in an effort to convince the White House thatIsrael’s fight against terrorism is our fight.”

Haqqani also collaborated with another neocon, Stephen Schwartz, on the Institute for Islamic Progress and Peace. A project of the notorious Islamophobe Daniel Pipes, it is widely suspected to be an attempt to “divide and conquer” the American Muslim community. In short, if Tel Aviv had handpicked Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington, they could hardly have found a more suitable candidate than Haqqani.

Also advancing “the Pakistan Connection” to the Times Square plot is Haqqani’s onetime collaborator Stephen Schwartz. Writing in Rupert Murdoch’s staunchly pro-Israel Weekly Standard, Schwartz pushes “the Pakistani Taliban did it” storyline. Faisal Shahzad’s arrest, he writes, “lends credibility to the claim by Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the branch of the Afghan terrorist movement operating there, that they planted the unsuccessful car-bomb.”

Like Zakaria, Schwartz holds Pakistani authorities responsible.

“Pakistani reality cannot be evaded,” he writes. “The jihadist domination seen in the Pakistani army and intelligence services (ISI) is visible everywhere South Asian Muslims congregate. It explains the reluctance of the Pakistani government to fulfill its commitment to fighting the Taliban. And it equally accounts for conspiracies like that foiled in Times Square.”

The one evading “Pakistani reality,” however, is Schwartz. If any government is to be held responsible for terrorism carried out by Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), it is not in Islamabad but in Tel Aviv or New Delhi.

As Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, revealed in a recent interview: “We have very little doubt that the Indians and the Israelis, that are all over Afghanistan with German passports pretending to be military contractors, are operating 17 camps along the Taliban regions training and arming terrorists.”

According to Duff, “The Pakistani Taliban is in close cooperation with, supplied, financed, armed and trained by Israel and India to attack Pakistan.”


Read more of this post

Pakistan’s Strategic Nuclear Assets: Why are they a thorn in the side of so many?

Add to Google Buzz

Shahid R. Siddiqi

INDIA’S explosion of its nuclear device in 1974 drew only a customary “show of concern” from the western powers. But Pakistan’s nuclear programme, initiated in response to the Indian acquisition of nuclear weapons, evoked immediate and “serious concern” from the same quarters. Ever since, Pakistan has been under immense pressure to scrap its programme while the Indians remain uncensored.

That western attitude was discriminatory can also be seen by the religious colour it gave to Pakistan’s bomb by calling it an ‘Islamic bomb’. One has never heard of the Israeli bomb being called a ‘Jewish Bomb’, or the Indian bomb a ‘Hindu Bomb’, or the American and British bomb a ‘Christian Bomb’ or the Soviet bomb a ‘Communist’ (or an ‘Atheist) Bomb’. The West simply used Pakistan’s bomb to make Islam synonymous with aggression and make its nuclear programme a legitimate target, knowing full well that it merely served a defensive purpose and was not even remotely associated with Islam.

With India going nuclear soon after playing a crucial role in dismembering Pakistan in 1971 and enjoying an overwhelming conventional military superiority over Pakistan in the ratio of 4:1, a resource strapped Pakistan was pushed to the wall. Left with no other choice but to develop a nuclear deterrent to ward off future Indian threats, Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto declared: “Pakistanis will eat grass but make a nuclear bomb”. And sure enough, they did it. Soon, however, both he and the nuclear programme were to become non-grata. Amid intense pressure, sanctions and vilification campaign, Henry Kissinger personally delivered to a defiant Bhutto the American threat: “give up your nuclear programme or else we will make a horrible example of you’.

And a horrible example was made of Bhutto for his defiance. But he had enabled Pakistan to become the 7th nuclear power in the world. This served Pakistan well. India was kept at bay despite temptations for military adventurism. Although there has never been real peace in South Asia, at least there has been no war since 1971.

Ignoring its security perspective, Pakistan’s western ‘friends’ refused to admit it to their exclusive nuclear club, though expediency made them ignore its ‘crime’ when it suited their purpose. But driven by identical geo-strategic interests in their respective regions and seeing Pakistan as an obstacle to their designs, Israel and India missed no opportunity to malign or subvert Pakistan’s programme. Read more of this post

All set to mark Youm-e-Takbeer today

Add to Google Buzz

ISLAMABAD : All is set to mark Youm-e-Takbeer on Friday across the country with a pledge to make Pakistan a stronger country, militarily and economically, among the comity of nations.

The day is commemorated every year on May 28 to mark the conduction of nuclear tests on the very day, in 1998, making Pakistan the first Muslim and the 7th nuclear country in the world.

Pakistan had conducted nuclear tests at Chaghi, Balochistan in response to five nuclear explosions conducted by India, threatening the security of Pakistan.

Chaghi Zone

Nuclear Tests by Pakistan on May 28, 1998 -(Chaghi,Balochistan province)

May 28, 1998 -Chaghi

Youm-e-Takbeer (May 28 , 1998)

by Haris Khan

Every nation displays their military hardware on different occasions. The basic purpose to perform such an act is to dispel a silent message to the enemy to “layoff”. Darwin rightly stated “it is survival of the fittest” so in foreign policy determinants being fit (economically and militarily) will guarantee your survive on the world map.

Pakistan is no exception to when it comes to dealing with Realpolitik as she faces a rouge neighbor in shape of India. Pakistan fought two major (1965 & 1971) and three minor wars(1948 Kashmir, Siachen 1984 & Kargil 1999) with India but all of them were fought with conventional weapons. Whenever there would be a crises situation around the world, former president of U.S, Bill Clinton, would ask his chiefs, which naval aircraft carrier is near to the hot zone thus proving the importance of battle ships in U.S foreign policy.

India triggered nuclear arms race in south-Asia back in 1974 when she detonated nuclear devices code named “Smiling Buddha” in pokhran range thus compelling Late Primer Z.A. Bhutto to state that, “we will eat grass but will built an atomic bomb”. Pakistan being a small country with limited depth in geography also had to adopt a profound strategy to limit Indian in terms of rash aggression. Bhutto called a secret meeting of Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (P.A.E.C) and other related nuclear scientists in multan back in 1974-75 and gave them his piece of mind. Some of them gave him 8 to 10 years time by adopting plutonium route which was way too difficult. Puzzled and quizzed for the time duration of making a bomb. Bhutto was approached by Dr. Abdul Qadeer khan and put forward a Uranium route for making a bomb in sharp 6 years. Bhutto eyes sparked and gave him the go ahead with the name “Project-706”. It is an open secret that Pakistan duged tunnels in chaghi and kharan by P.A.E.C up till 1980 did cold testing of its bomb between 1982 and 1984. Some conspiracies even go to the extent of saying that, for hot tests the devices were shifted to china where it had a 100% success rate. 80’s was the time when U.S president Ronald Regan would personally give guarantees to the loud heard senator, John glen and the rest of congressmen criticizing Pakistan nuclear program. Pakistan moved silently and tested its F-16’s in wind tunnels as to see the performance of outfitter pods for carrying nuclear devices.

In the whole affair Israel moved fast and Mossad dispatched parcel bombs around the globe to component suppliers of Pakistan nuclear program. In a joint plan they even collaborated with India to strike at the heart of Khan Research Laboratory to destroy the crown jewels of Pakistan in a repeat strike plan of Osirak plant. Again a message was conveyed silently by former ambassador Agha Shahi and both refrained from attempting such an act of aggression.

In 1998 India fired “Prithvi missile” and balance of power tilted towards India. Pakistan reciprocated and fired “Ghori missile”. Later India did 5 hot tests of nuclear devices up to 40 kt yield. Pakistan was given threats every day by BJP leaders in India but Pakistan kept its nerves cool. After more than 17 days and upholding intense pressure by Americans Pakistan reciprocated and detonated five nuclear devices in the Chagai Hills in the Chaghai district, Balochistan. This operation was named Chagai-I.


Since that day Pakistani nation have kept their heads held high but such a scenario was short lived. Our so called leaders have let us down and we irrespective of being a nuclear power nation have been sliced to a status of a paper tiger. We have forgotten “yom-e-takbir”, the day when we took out our crown jewels from the basement and showed it to the world. Yes, we the Pakistanis have no designs of conquering India or disturbing world peace but we prepare ourselves “not on our enemy’s preparations but his intention”. It is high time to unite Pakistan and not to further divide it. Our enemy is shred and dividing us on ethnic lines and we have to thwart this danger from roots. May ALLAH be with Pakistan.

Haris Khan is a journalist with Khyber TV, Pakistan.

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

US troops suffer deadliest losses in Marjah amid operation al-Fath

Add to Google Buzz


A mine blast killed about 6 US soldiers in Marjah in the morning hours of May 20, 2010. In another incident elsewhere in Marjah, Mujahideen killed about 10 US-led coalition troops in an ambush attack, seizing the abandoned weapons and ammo in the noon hours of Thursday. In another news from Helmand province, a roadside bomb ripped through a group of some 20 foreign soldiers who gathered around a discovered mine as it exploded to them, but it is unclear how many were killed, meanwhile the other foreign soldiers approached the scene to recover the dead when they came under Mujahideen attack which caused the enemy further losses of live and injuries. The dead and wounded were evacuated by the US helicopters from the site. Also Thursday, at least three US-NATO soldiers were killed with two others injured in a clash with Mujahideen in Marjah. (Taliban website)

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

Why the Surge is Likely to Fail

Add to Google Buzz

Will the Taliban Reclaim Control of Afghanistan?

More than eight years after dismantling the Taliban, the United States is still mired in Afghanistan. Indeed, last October it launched a much-hyped ‘surge’ to prevent a second Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, not imminent yet, but eminently possible.

The first dismantling of the Taliban was a cakewalk.

In 2001, the United States quickly and decisively defeated the Taliban, killed, captured or scattered their fighters, and handed over the running of Afghanistan to their rivals, mostly Uzbeks and Tajiks from the Northern Alliance.

Unaware of Pashtoon history, American commentators were pleased at the smashing victory of their military, convinced that they had consigned the Taliban to history’s graveyard.

Instead, the Taliban came back from the dead. Within months of their near-total destruction, they had regained morale, regrouped, organized, trained, and returned to fight what they saw as a foreign occupation of their country. Slowly, tenaciously they continued to build on their gains, and by 2008 they were dreaming of taking back the country they had lost in 2001.

Could this really happen? That only time will tell, but prospects for the Taliban today look better than at any time since November 2001.

In 2001, the United States had captured Afghanistan with the loss of only twelve of its own troops. Last year it lost 316 soldiers, and the British lost another 108. The numbers speak for themselves.

The United States had occupied Afghanistan with 9000 troops. When Obama took office in January 2009, these numbers had climbed to 30,000. In October, US troop strength in Afghanistan had more than doubled. This does not include tens of thousands of foreign contractors and some 200,000 Afghan troops armed and trained by the Americans.

Yet, NATO could not deter the Taliban advance.

That is when President Obama ordered a troop surge. US troop strength will soon reach 100,000. At the same time, the United States is inviting Taliban fighters to defect in return for bribes. In tandem, President Karzai – for the umpteenth time – is offering amnesty to defecting Taliban fighters. So far, there have been no high-ranking defections.

Can the United States defeat these men – returned from the dead – it calls terrorists? It is a vital question. It should be, since the United States claims that if the Taliban come back, Afghanistan will again become a haven for Al-Qaida, their training ground and launching pad for future attacks against Western targets.

How did the Taliban stage this comeback?
Read more of this post

%d bloggers like this: