Archive for December 9, 2008

Mumbai: Why are Jews a Target?

Posted in Terrorism, Zionism with tags , , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground

Terrorist attack in Mumbai, India: When there is a conflict between Pakistan and India, why are Jews a Target?

Together with all of the Jewish people, we mourn the indescribable loss of all those murdered in Mumbai, India, and in particular our Jewish brethren, precious souls. The unforgettable noble soul Rabbi Aryeh Leibush Teitelbaum of blessed memory, a strong follower of True Torah Jews Against Zionism, and a relative of that famous champion of the anti-Zionist cause, Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum; the well-respected Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg; Rebbetzin Rivkah Holtzberg; Benzion Korman; and other Jews. They were all murdered in cold blood by the hands of the terrorists. G-d will certainly take revenge on all who kill innocent people, and especially such precious souls, no matter what their justification was for such a heinous crime. Whoever does not respect the life of G-ds creations will have to face Heavenly retribution on the great and awesome Day of Judgment.

The question, however, is: what was the motive of the terrorists in attacking a small Jewish synagogue with a few Jews in it, when they could have attacked a large hotel or other public place and claimed many more victims?

The answer: Zionism!

Please read the following words of the only surviving terrorist, excerpted from the Times of India:

Kasab has told police that they were sent with a specific mission of targeting Israelis to avenge atrocities on Palestinians. This was why they targeted Nariman House, a complex meant for Israelis. Sources said Kasab’s colleagues, killed in the operation, had stayed in Nariman House earlier.

Read the words of the Wall Street Journal:

One of the assailants, who identified himself as Imran Babar and said his unit contained six militants, used Mr. Holtzberg’s cellphone to call a popular Indian TV show on Thursday. In the call, he fumed about a recent visit by Major-General Avi Mizrahi, head of Israel’s Ground Forces Command, to the disputed Indian state of Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim area where Indian forces are battling an Islamic insurgency.

Zionism has already brought so many misfortunes upon Jews, and they have their share in this tragedy as well.

From this tragedy we also see the obligation of the hour and the importance of making known to the entire world that Zionists do not represent Jews. True Torah Jews did not create the State of Israel, and have no connection to it. We do not vote in its elections; we do not accept their monetary benefits. It is therefore a terrible crime to blame the Jewish people in general for their actions.

We are looking for more funding and new tactics so that our voice and our outcry should be heard around the world. We must break through the wall of the media, which ignores our message.

At the same time, we wish to protest against the Zionists shameful act of desecration of the victims bodies. They draped their coffins with Zionist flags, and made their funerals into a sensational Zionist ceremony, with the purpose of gaining political capital at the victims expense. How can we bear the pain of the Teitelbaum family, who unceasingly pleaded with the Zionist officials not to hold these ceremonies? What happened would have certainly offended the deceased Aryeh Leibush. Sources say that the family offered to pay for a private plane to fly Aryeh Leibushs body to the Holy Land for burial, so that he would not have to go in the Zionist air force jet.

The Jerusalem Post reports:

Teitelbaum’s family had rejected Israel’s offer to include him in the official memorial ceremony at Ben-Gurion Airport on Monday night, when the victim’s bodies arrived from India on an IAF jet. In line with their group’s anti-Zionist stance, the family emphasized that they wanted no government involvement in the burial of Teitelbaum’s remains, nor did they did want his coffin to be wrapped in an Israeli flag as those of the other Jewish and Israeli victims would be.

Haaretz reports:

Victim’s family rejects offer of official memorial ceremony

Teitelboim’s family, which belongs to the anti-Zionist Satmar Hassidic sect of Orthodox Judaism, has rejected Israel’s offer to hold an official memorial ceremony for him along with the other Jewish and Israeli fatalities.

But all their entreaties fell on deaf ears.

Rabbi Aryeh Leibush Teitelbaum grew up in the Satmar Chassidic community in New York, a community well known for its anti-Zionist stance. He married the daughter of the Rebbe of Toldos Avraham Yitzchok, also a well known anti-Zionist group. He was an American-born Jew living in Jerusalem, and he never chose to become an Israeli citizen. He never accepted government benefits, although he needed money to support his large family of children. Instead he earned his livelihood by traveling around the world working for kosher supervising agencies. He considered participation in the Zionist elections to be a severe sin.

In short, he was a strong opponent of the Zionist state, yet unfortunately, as he was laid to eternal rest, he was dealt a disgraceful blow. For Orthodox Jews, who believe in the Afterlife, it is clear that such treatment is like a second death.

Our message to the Zionists is:

Haratzachta vegam yarashta?

Have you killed this man and inherited him as well? Is it not enough that he died as an innocent casualty of your conflict? Do you have to reap benefit from his death too?

May we be privileged to see the redemption, when there will be peace throughout the world.

Source :

Six million Jews were killed as a result of the Zionists

Posted in Israel, Zionism with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground

Vayoel Moshe
Vayoel Moshe

Written by Satmar Grand Rebbe Joel Teitelbaum, zt’l
Translation of Section 110, Vayoel Moshe, published in 1961, (from the middle of Section 110):

Six million Jews were killed as a result of the Zionists

Everyone ignores the fact that it has been these Zionist groups that have attracted the Jewish people and have violated the Oath against establishing a Jewish entity before the arrival of the Messiah. It is because of the Zionists that six million Jews were killed. The fact is that this is the bitter punishment stipulated in the Talmud…. (Tractate Ketuboth, p. 111), which results in the payment of a spiritual and physical debt from the Jewish People. Afflictions and tribulations only appear in this world because of the wicked, and the punishment is meted out first upon the righteous. However the Zionists have committed horrible actions; that they have always slandered and spoken libelously against the Jewish People to other nations, and have even inciting non-Jewish leaders against the Jewish People to convince them to expel Jews from their countries. The Zionists believed that this strategy would make it easier to take over the Holy Land and establish their State there.

We see from letters written by great rabbis in the early days of Zionism how great was their deathly fear of the consequences of the slander and libel of the Zionists; unfortunately their fears were realized.

In addition to this, facts have come to light regarding the extent of the cruelties committed by Zionist organizations that resulted in the whole dreadful catastrophe. Some of these activities that took place in Hungary came to light as well in court cases that later occurred in the Holy Land. The Zionists undertook a number of explicit actions that they believed would assist them in meeting their objectives in the creation a state. It is not, however, my intention to discuss this subject at length in this book because I am writing it solely for the purpose of clarifying Jewish law as it pertains to the establishment of a state. However, I mention these events to point out the fact that it is only this abominable idea of establishing a state that has caused all the hardships, sufferings and misfortunes that have befallen us, aside from the fact of countless Jews who have died because of the Zionist wars that are forbidden by Jewish law.

The actions committed by the Zionists provoked hatred and persecution against Jews living in Arab Lands

The majority of Jews from Arab countries who have come to the Zionist state had resided in peace and tranquility, lacking nothing, until the establishment of the heretical regime, that is, the Zionist state, which has been the original cause of hatred and persecution in their native countries. The Zionists themselves made this all possible with various tricks and ruses in order to increase the persecution so that the Jews living in Arab lands would have to move to the Holy Land utterly penniless. Then the Zionists bragged about this that they were the “saviors” of these Jews although it had been the Zionists themselves who were the initial cause of all this upheaval.

Section 111

On the contrary, the Zionists worked to make sure that the doors of many nations were closed to Jewish refugees

The Zionists constantly boast that the only place of refuge on earth for Jews is their state. However, anyone with a brain in his head can see that it has been because of the Zionists that the doors of other countries were shut to the Jews. This is because the Zionists always exert every effort to prevent Jews from going anywhere else other than to their own state. Any person who takes even the slightest action of offering Jews the possibility of finding refuge in any other country to fulfill the statement of our Sages in the Talmud (Tractate Pesachim, p. 87) that “G-d did an act of charity to disperse the Jews among the nations” faces savage attacks of all kinds from the Zionists, who hurl all types of insults, slander and curses, claiming that such a person is a self-hating Jew who hates the Holy Land.

Moreover, Zionist officials and ministers fan out all over the world, attending banquets with world officials to convince them to refuse to allow their nation to serve as lands of refuge for Jews, and on the contrary, implore them to coercively redirect these Jews to the Zionist state in violation of the Oath prohibiting mass immigration to the Holy Land as explained by the Talmudic sages. The Zionists coerce most of those Jews who have arrived in the Zionist State into heresy and apostasy, and the children of these Jews are defiled in dreadful ways. These “immigrants” continue to suffer poverty and enormous destitution. All the Zionists care about is that they should have a strong state with a huge pool of available soldiers for their army and other coercive organizations and activities.

These Zionist evildoers used their G-d-given free will to choose evil, arrogance and heresy, and have been the cause of all the suffering and tribulations to the Jewish People to assure that Jews find no peace and respite in any country, and work to assure that the doors of the nations are shut. Furthermore, nations can claim that they do not have to offer refuge to Jews because the Jews now have their own state where they can seek refuge. The Zionists, who are viewed by the nations as the leaders of the Jewish People, demand that Jews not go anywhere other than to their state.

However, it is obvious that were it not for the Zionist state, the biblical promise to our Patriarch Jacob that his descendants would always find refuge and solace would be fulfilled. The Zionists declare that only they are the “saviors” of the Jewish People; just two years ago they boast that they were “rescuing” refugees from Egypt, despite the fact that it was the Zionists themselves who caused all the suffering and expulsions, as is the case in all their activities. Just recently it was publicly that the Zionists demanded that a number of nations accept no Jewish refugees.

If not for the Zionists the British government would have kept the doors of their country open, and a large number of Jews would have been saved

While the British government still controlled the Holy Land, the Zionists, who the British saw were seeking to establish their state, were the direct reason why they chose to close their doors to prevent a large influx of Jews. Anyone who remembers who these events unfolded knows for a fact that were it not for the Zionists with their heretical ideas of establishing a state, the doors of the Holy Land itself would have remained open to Jewish refugees, and many Jews would have been saved. During Islamic (Turkish) rule in the Holy Land, the reason that the gates of the Land were closed because of the Turks feared Zionist immigration.

The Zionists were authorized by the British to distribute annual immigration permits, and sought to offer such permits only to those Jews who were Zionists and supported the path of Zionism, heresy and atheism. Anyone wishing to travel to the Holy Land has to flatter the Zionists and their ways. Scripture warns us with regard to heresy (Mishley, 5:8): Stay away from its doorway, and it all the more dangerous for anyone who has to agree to their “doorways” and follow their teachings, as has been the cause that tens of thousands of pure Jewish souls were to die, and many were the fatalities of those ensnared to this heresy under the guise of love for the Holy Land. This is why many G-d fearing Jews have been reluctant to travel to the Holy Land. Anyone fearing G-d fears the danger of heresy more than any other danger in the world. This is all merely the tip of the iceberg concerning the tribulations and suffering that has befallen the Jewish People because of them.

Why the Zionists resemble an arsonist who sets a fire and then scrambles to assist the victims, who imagine the arsonist to be the savior

In my later years I heard an important rabbi offer a fitting parable about the Zionists: Once there was an evil and cruel man who was vengeful and constantly on alert. He wanted to take revenge against his friend, and burn all his and wealth and possessions. So he hired a second wicked person who was expert in these sorts operations to do his task in a way that the victim would not even notice that it was he who had committed this act. Since the hired criminal knew that the would-be victim often welcomed guests into his home, he went to the victim’s home in the evening disguised as a guest and asked for a place to spend the night. The unwitting victim welcomed him in immediately and gave him a room for the night. In the middle of the night the wicked man observed that the householder and his family members were all asleep and that they would not notice anything. He silently set about to start a fire in a hidden area and then quickly returned to his room and pretended to be asleep.

The flames soon became noticeable and awakened the entire household in great panic; everyone soon realized that everything was on fire, but due to their confusion, panic and sorrow, the members of the family could not properly decide how to save their property. In order to avoid suspicion the wicked guest, who had caused the fire, pretended to wake up in great panic and rushed to the aid of the householder, who noticed that the guest was able to calmly do a good job to save more furniture and household objects than the householder himself.

The following morning, when the householder went to the synagogue with a heavy and bitter spirit, he told his friends what had happened in the terrible calamity that befallen him. He explained that he was now left impoverished and destitute, and that he had no idea where to look for a new home and livelihood. While telling the story he mentioned the importance of the commandment of welcoming guests, because of which he had invited a guest to his home to whom he was grateful for having helped save what little could be rescued from the fire in his home. The victim of the arsonist was asked by his friends to identify the guest. He described him, and they immediately recognized him as the very cruel and wicked man who was renown for these sorts of deeds.

His friends mocked him and told him to watch himself because were it not for that “guest,” there would have been no fire at all, for the “guest” was actually an arsonist who had set fire to the house, and was no “savior” at all. They added that the householder should never again allow that evildoer to cross his threshold, for if he ever again has anything to do with that evildoer, his tricks will be even worse, and could result in the death of the householder altogether, G-d forbid.

The lesson of this parable is obvious – through their sins and their deeds the Zionists are the cause of all troubles and sufferings, yet they always come around to brag that they are the “saviors” when they are actually the arsonists! Those that do not wish to seek the truth fall for the ruse and think that they are saviors. Satan blinds their eyes so that they end up in heresy and atheism, G-d forbid. By analyzing all the activities of the Zionists one can easily discover that their acts are utter destruction and no salvation. It would require a book specifically dedicated to this subject to deal with this subject, but I already wrote that in this book I do not wish to get into these issues, but simply wanted to shed light on these matters. G-d will guide those that seek the truth, but this is the hardest and last challenge that has faced the Jewish People until now. The tribulations prior to the arrival of the Messiah have already been described in the Talmud by Rabbi Yochanan, who said that cannot tolerate any more suffering and that we now we need the mercy of G-d to strengthen our true faith in G-d, his holy Torah and in his servants who have served him with all their hearts and souls in the generations before us.

Source :

What’s Really Going On With Gold And Silver?

Posted in Economics, USA with tags , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground

By Alex Panameno

When gold hit $700 per oz, it brought the price to a negative 7% compared to a year ago. This would roughly mirror the huge correction “within” the bull market we saw from 1970 to 1980. The same Bull Run that took gold from $34.50oz. In January 1970, to $850oz. by January 1980, that’s roughly a 2,450% increase!

The question still lies… Why has gold dropped?

I challenge you to see things for what they really are, in terms of U.S. dollars; Gold has indeed dropped from its March highs of $1,000 per oz.

That’s only because gold is traded in U.S. dollars and the U.S. dollar has rose so much against other currencies. In fact, if you are in Australia, New Zealand, Europe, or most other countries, gold is actually at an all time high!

Let’s take a closer look at the reasons the U.S. dollar has surged higher.

To say the U.S. dollar rally is real or sustainable is like saying everything we know about economics is wrong! How can the U.S. dollar get stronger as the U.S. economy deteriorates?

The obvious answer is that it can’t!

The U.S. dollar is being devalued at an alarming rate. Faster than what took place in Argentina, Mexico, and Russia put together. The only difference is that our government has better ways to hide it.

Just think about the recent bailouts, how much has our government thrown down the endless “bail out hole”

Let’s add it up!

* $ 800 billion to support mortgage consumer debt.

* $100 billion for Fannie Mae

* $100 billion for Freddie Mac

* $150 billion for Stimulus package (from January)

* $8 billion for Indymac

* $29 billion for Bear Stearns

* $ 700 billion for Wall Street ( Bank of America; Merrill Lynch, City Group, JP Morgan, Washington Mutual, Wells Fargo; Wachovia, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs)

* $143.8 Billion for AIG ( which keeps growing)

* $25 Billion for the big three in Detroit.

* $138 billion for Lehman Brothers (post bankruptcy) through JP Morgan.

* $ 50 Billion for money market funds.

* $ 620 billion for general currency swaps from the feds.

Totaling : $2,863,800,000,000

This doesn’t include the hundreds of billions the feds have and will continue to buy in commercial paper. Plus, what they lend out to other financial firms.

Not to mention, the feds recent supply of new credit lines to Brazil, Mexico, South Korea, and Singapore to “help those countries deal with the global credit crisis.” The feds will start at $30 billion and have promised up to $100 billion dollars per country.

Can someone say hyper-inflation!

If you can’t see where the U.S. dollar and gold are headed, I’ll be crystal clear! The dollar is going in the exact same direction as the Zimbabwe dollar and Mexican peso. Between the last devaluations of the peso, it’s lost 99.9%. If you want to know the price of gold in old pesos; you just have to multiply gold by 100,000.

With everything that has taken place, many “main-stream” TV commentators believe or want us to believe, that the U.S. dollar is now the currency of choice; a safe haven or flight to quality.

Nothing can be further from the truth.

The fact is that the U.S. dollar is now seen as a liability, not an asset. More and more countries are walking away from it.

The reason the U.S. dollar has gone higher is due to the $598 trillion dollar derivatives market. You see, hedge funds have over leveraged themselves and have been hit with tremendous margin calls as markets move against them. They have been forced to liquidate their investments overseas, which is why overseas markets are now crashing. They’re liquidating to come up with equity to pay off margin accounts, which need to be paid off in U.S. dollars.

The dollar is NOT rising because it’s a “safe haven” or a flight to quality; but rather to satisfy U.S. margin accounts. Remember until further notice, margin accounts in most emerging world markets can also be satisfied in U.S. dollars hence, the surge in demand for the U.S. dollar over the past few weeks.

Now let’s talk about deflation. It’s true deflation is here! Deflation is a normal stage in any depressionary economic cycle. Prices of goods and services are going down, they have to. We have an over inventory of cars, electronics, homes, etcS The universal law of supply and demand kicks in. Sellers of goods and services are forced to devalue their prices in order to attract buyers. Regardless of lower prices, people just aren’t buying.

Have no fear, deflation won’t be here long. The un-federal reserve assures us of that, every time they create money out of thin air.

Hyper inflation is just around the corner!

Anyone with a head on their shoulders knows that current consumer price index (CPI) is phony! Real inflation is much higher then government reported numbers.

Whether you believe hyper inflation is coming or not, you better prepare for it.

It happened to the Argentina, Russia, Germany, and recently to Zimbabwe.

It’s true; our government is just as irresponsible in their creation of money.

Another key issue that’s looming on the horizon is the five dollar floor for mutual funds. By law, mutual funds have to sell out of stocks that are trading under $5 per share. With the recent drop in the Dow, a lot of stocks are getting dangerously close to that mark, and when they get there, all mutual funds holding that stock, will have to sell it, creating a snow ball effect. Plus don’t forget we are walking into the worst retail Christmas season, ever forecasted. When the depressing numbers hit Wall Street, get ready to see the DOW take another dive!

Now let’s talk about the nasty rumor of market manipulation and price fixing in the gold and silver markets.

The commodity futures trading commission (CFTC) puts out the “Commitments of Traders” (COT) reports. In where the public can clearly see the net long or short positions held by non-commercial and commercial institutions in all exchange trade commodity markets. Well, without dragging this out.. It’s true! Up until the first week of November, two well known bullion banks held %76 of all the short positions in the silver pits and the same two Institutions also held 60% of all the short positions in the gold pits at the New York Mercantile Exchange and the COMEX division.

The question is, “can this go on forever”? The answer is NO!

In fact, the CFTC is now in an active investigation of both the gold and silver pits.

Plus! At or before the expiration of the specified futures contract (gold/silver) all short positions must be satisfied by either the sale of the commodity (gold and silver) or the buying back of the short position. Well, we know they can’t sell metals they don’t have, therefore the only other option is to buy the short positions back, with a sizable profit I’m sure. Nevertheless, they will be bought back. Which will add a frenzy of buying, ultimately sparking the next Bull Run in that market.

Ladies and gentlemen, the time has never been better to own tangible gold and silver. We all know what gold and silver are capable of when the buying frenzy starts. You don’t need to be a doomsdayer to know that the worst is yet to come.

* The largest load of bank loans re-adjusting the first quarter of 2009 and not stopping until 2012

* Bank failures

* Foreclosures

* Rising unemployment.

* Inflation

* Crashing U.S. dollar

* The introduction of the North American Union and the Amero.

These are all the reasons why more and more people are gravitating to Tangible metals.

Alex Panameno

Trading Director

Goldworth Financial

Source :

Pictures :

Afghanistan, Another Untold Story

Posted in Terrorism, USA, Who is The Real Terrorist? with tags , , , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground

by Michael Parenti

Barack Obama is on record as advocating a military escalation in Afghanistan. Before sinking any deeper into that quagmire, we might do well to learn something about recent Afghan history and the role played by the United States.

Less than a month after the 11 September  2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, US leaders began an all-out aerial assault upon Afghanistan, the country purportedly harboring Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist organization. More than twenty years earlier, in 1980, the United States intervened to stop a Soviet “invasion” of that country. Even some leading progressive writers, who normally take a more critical view of US policy abroad, treated the US intervention against the Soviet-supported government as “a good thing.” The actual story is not such a good thing.

Some Real History

Since feudal times the landholding system in Afghanistan had remained unchanged, with more than 75 percent of the land owned by big landlords who comprised only 3 percent of the rural population. In the mid-1960s, democratic revolutionary elements coalesced to form the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). In 1973, the king was deposed, but the government that replaced him proved to be autocratic, corrupt, and unpopular. It in turn was forced out in 1978 after a massive demonstration in front of the presidential palace, and after the army intervened on the side of the demonstrators.

The military officers who took charge invited the PDP to form a new government under the leadership of Noor Mohammed Taraki, a poet and novelist. This is how a Marxist-led coalition of national democratic forces came into office. “It was a totally indigenous happening. Not even the CIA blamed the USSR for it,” writes John Ryan, a retired professor  at the University of Winnipeg, who was conducting an agricultural research project in Afghanistan at about that time.

The Taraki government proceeded to legalize labor unions, and set up a minimum wage,  a progressive income tax, a literacy campaign, and programs that gave ordinary people greater access to health care, housing, and public sanitation. Fledgling peasant cooperatives were started and price reductions on some key foods were imposed.

The government also continued a campaign begun by the king to emancipate women from their age-old tribal bondage. It provided public education for girls and for the children of various tribes.
A report in the San Francisco Chronicle (17 November 2001) noted that under the Taraki regime Kabul had been “a cosmopolitan city. Artists and hippies flocked to the capital. Women studied agriculture, engineering and business at the city’s university. Afghan women held government jobs—-in the 1980s, there were seven female members of parliament. Women drove cars, traveled and went on dates. Fifty percent of university students were women.”

The Taraki government moved to eradicate the cultivation of opium poppy. Until then Afghanistan had been producing more than 70 percent of the opium needed for the world’s heroin supply. The government also abolished all debts owed by farmers, and began developing a major land reform program. Ryan believes that it was a “genuinely popular government and people looked forward to the future with great hope.”

But serious opposition arose from several quarters. The feudal landlords opposed the land reform program that infringed on their holdings. And tribesmen and fundamentalist mullahs vehemently opposed the government’s dedication to gender equality and the education of women and children.

Because of its egalitarian and collectivist economic policies the Taraki government also incurred the opposition of the US national security state. Almost immediately after the PDP coalition came to power, the CIA, assisted by Saudi and Pakistani military, launched a large scale intervention into Afghanistan on the side of the ousted feudal lords, reactionary tribal chieftains, mullahs, and opium traffickers.

A top official within the Taraki government was Hafizulla Amin, believed by many to have been recruited by the CIA during the several years he spent in the United States as a student. In September 1979, Amin seized state power in an armed coup. He executed Taraki, halted the reforms, and murdered, jailed, or exiled thousands of Taraki supporters as he moved toward establishing a fundamentalist Islamic state. But within two months, he was overthrown by PDP remnants including elements within the military.

It should be noted that all this happened before  the Soviet military intervention. National security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski publicly admitted–months before Soviet troops entered the country–that the Carter administration was providing huge sums to Muslim extremists to subvert the reformist government. Part of that effort involved brutal attacks by the CIA-backed mujahideen against schools and teachers in rural areas.

In late 1979, the seriously besieged PDP government asked Moscow to send a contingent of troops to help ward off the mujahideen (Islamic guerrilla fighters) and foreign mercenaries, all recruited, financed, and well-armed by the CIA. The Soviets already had been sending aid for projects in mining, education, agriculture, and public health. Deploying troops represented a commitment of a more serious and politically dangerous sort. It took repeated requests from Kabul before Moscow agreed to intervene militarily.

Jihad and Taliban, CIA Style

The Soviet intervention was a golden opportunity for the CIA to transform the tribal resistance into a holy war, an Islamic jihad to expel the godless communists from Afghanistan. Over the years the United States and Saudi Arabia expended about $40 billion on the war in Afghanistan. The CIA and its allies recruited, supplied, and trained almost 100,000 radical mujahideen from forty Muslim countries including Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Algeria, and Afghanistan itself.  Among those who answered the call was Saudi-born millionaire right-winger Osama bin Laden and his cohorts.

After a long and unsuccessful war, the Soviets evacuated the country in February 1989. It is generally thought that the PDP Marxist government collapsed immediately after the Soviet departure. Actually, it retained enough popular support to fight on for another three years, outlasting the Soviet Union itself by a year.

Upon taking over Afghanistan, the mujahideen fell to fighting among themselves.  They ravaged the cities, terrorized civilian populations, looted, staged mass executions, closed schools, raped thousands of women and girls, and reduced half of Kabul to rubble. In 2001 Amnesty International reported that the mujahideen used sexual assault as “a method of intimidating vanquished populations and rewarding soldiers.’”

Ruling the country gangster-style and looking for lucrative sources of income, the tribes ordered farmers to plant opium poppy. The Pakistani ISI, a close junior partner to the CIA, set up hundreds of heroin laboratories across Afghanistan. Within two years of the CIA’s arrival, the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderland became the biggest producer of heroin in the world.

Largely created and funded by the CIA, the mujahideen mercenaries now took on a life of their own. Hundreds of them returned home to Algeria, Chechnya, Kosovo, and Kashmir to carry on terrorist attacks in Allah’s name against the purveyors of secular “corruption.”

In Afghanistan itself,  by 1995 an extremist strain of Sunni Islam called the Taliban—heavily funded and advised by the ISI and the CIA and with the support of Islamic political parties in Pakistan—fought its way to power, taking over most of the country, luring many tribal chiefs into its fold with threats and bribes.

The Taliban promised to end the factional fighting and banditry that was the mujahideen trademark. Suspected murderers and spies were executed monthly in the sports stadium, and those accused of thievery had the offending hand sliced off.  The Taliban condemned forms of “immorality” that included premarital sex, adultery, and homosexuality. They also outlawed all music, theater, libraries, literature, secular education, and much scientific research.

The Taliban unleashed a religious reign of terror, imposing an even stricter interpretation of Muslim law than used by most of the Kabul clergy. All men were required to wear untrimmed beards and women had to wear the burqa which covered them from head to toe, including their faces. Persons who were slow to comply were dealt swift and severe punishment by the Ministry of Virtue. A woman who fled an abusive home or charged spousal abuse would herself be severely whipped by the theocratic authorities. Women were outlawed from social life, deprived of most forms of medical care, barred from all levels of education, and any opportunity to work outside the home. Women who were deemed “immoral” were stoned to death or buried alive.

None of this was of much concern to leaders in Washington who got along famously with the Taliban. As recently as 1999, the US government was paying the entire annual salary of every single Taliban government official. Not until October 2001, when President George W. Bush had to rally public opinion behind his bombing campaign in Afghanistan did he denounce the Taliban’s oppression of women. His wife, Laura Bush, emerged overnight as a full-blown feminist to deliver a public address detailing some of the abuses committed against Afghan women.

If anything positive can be said about the Taliban, it is that they did put a stop to much of the looting, raping, and random killings that the mujahideen had practiced on a regular basis. In 2000 Taliban authorities also eradicated the cultivation of opium poppy throughout the areas under their control, an effort judged by the  United Nations International Drug Control Program to have been nearly totally successful. With the Taliban overthrown and a Western-selected mujahideen government reinstalled in Kabul by December 2001, opium poppy production in Afghanistan increased dramatically.

The years of war that have followed have taken tens of thousands of Afghani lives. Along with those killed by Cruise missiles, Stealth bombers, Tomahawks, daisy cutters, and land mines are those who continue to die of hunger, cold, lack of shelter, and lack of water.

The Holy Crusade for Oil and Gas

While claiming to be fighting terrorism, US leaders have found other compelling but less advertised reasons for plunging deeper into Afghanistan. The Central Asian region is rich in oil and gas reserves. A decade before 9/11, Time magazine (18 March 1991) reported that US policy elites were contemplating a military presence in Central Asia. The discovery of vast oil and gas reserves in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan provided the lure, while the dissolution of the USSR removed the one major barrier against pursuing an aggressive interventionist policy in that part of the world.

US oil companies acquired the rights to some 75 percent of these new reserves. A major problem was how to transport the oil and gas from the landlocked region. US officials opposed using the Russian pipeline or the most direct route across Iran to the Persian Gulf. Instead, they and the corporate oil contractors explored a number of alternative pipeline routes, across Azerbaijan and Turkey to the Mediterranean or across China to the Pacific.

The route favored by Unocal, a US based oil company, crossed Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean. The intensive negotiations that Unocal entered into with the Taliban regime remained unresolved by 1998, as an Argentine company placed a competing bid for the pipeline. Bush’s war against the Taliban rekindled UNOCAL’s hopes for getting a major piece of the action.

Interestingly enough, neither the Clinton nor Bush administrations ever placed Afghanistan on the official State Department list of states charged with sponsoring terrorism, despite the acknowledged presence of Osama bin Laden as a guest of the Taliban government.  Such a “rogue state” designation would have made it impossible for a US oil or construction company to enter an agreement with Kabul for a pipeline to the Central Asian oil and gas fields.

In sum, well in advance of the 9/11 attacks the US government had made preparations to move against the Taliban and create a compliant regime in Kabul and a direct US military presence in Central Asia. The 9/11 attacks provided the perfect impetus, stampeding US public opinion and reluctant allies into supporting military intervention.

One might agree with John Ryan who argued that if Washington had left the Marxist Taraki government alone back in 1979, “there would have been no army of mujahideen, no Soviet intervention, no war that destroyed Afghanistan, no Osama bin Laden, and no September 11 tragedy.” But it would be asking too much for Washington to leave unmolested a progressive leftist government that was organizing the social capital around collective public needs rather than private accumulation.

US intervention in Afghanistan has proven not much different from US intervention in Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama, and elsewhere. It had the same intent of preventing egalitarian social change, and the same effect of overthrowing an economically reformist government. In all these instances, the intervention brought retrograde elements into ascendance, left the economy in ruins, and pitilessly laid waste to many innocent lives.

The war against Afghanistan, a battered impoverished country, continues to be portrayed in US official circles as a gallant crusade against terrorism. If it ever was that, it also has been a means to other things: destroying a leftist revolutionary social order, gaining profitable control of one of the last vast untapped reserves of the earth’s dwindling fossil fuel supply, and planting US bases and US military power into still another region of the world.

In the face of all this Obama’s call for “change” rings hollow.

Michael Parenti’s recent books are Contrary Notions: The Michael Parenti Reader and the forthcoming God and His Demons. For further information, visit

Source :

The Mumbai Attacks The Real Perpetrators and their Goals

Posted in Israel, Terrorism with tags , , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground
Pakistani security forces raided a camp of a charity run by ...
picture : AFP

For the past many months, the world’s eyes were focused towards the horrendous developing situation in India, wherein a serving Lieutenant General was charged guilty of massacre against both Hindus and Muslims in the “Samjhauta (Friendship) Express”

train in which countless people were burnt alive in their cottages before reaching Pakistan from India. . His name was Lt. Col. Purohit, who was later on reported to have also supplied RDX chemical explosives to Hindu extremists to carry out their attacks.

But then after a few days, suddenly there appear ten “Pakistani” individuals (mostly young) who run about the vicinity of Mumbai wreaking havoc and carnage wherever they go. The Indian media, though know for its objective and straightforward reporting, for the first time showing irresponsibility pointed the finger straight towards Pakistan and its nationals. This has never happened before.

Pakistani soldiers patrol the restive Swat valley in February ...

Some of the notable events and occurrences that are indeed questionable during all these tensions include:

  • How did “people who sailed from Karachi” come to know about the exact whereabouts of the city and especially the layout of the hotel premises? Employees of the Taj Hotel have said that the way in which the terrorists rioted through the whole building was amazing. One of them even said that “They know the place better than us or for that matter, even the Manager himself!”
  • Pictures of one of the attackers in a black T-shirt and grey jeans have been spread over the internet. Even the Associated Press managed to capture a picture, which also clearly shows that the attacker had been wearing an orange-colored male bangle in his left arm. Many Hindu religious sources including Wikipedia clearly say that such bangles are worn by far-right Hindus (too conservative) on their right arms (by males) and left arms (by females).. Similar orange bangles were also worn by Hindu extremists when they were openly slaughtering Muslims in Gujarat and Christians in Orissa. Some religious sources say that the wearing of these bangles signify the “good-luck charm for the fulfillment of any religious undertaking”. Sort of like a “Hindu jihad”, if I were to basically put it that way. The question is: Why would a “fundamentalist Muslim” who is willing to “wage war against the infidels” wear a bangle that purely represents extremist Hindu ideology and beliefs?
  • Immediately reports came in the Indian media that the “Deccan Mujahideen” claimed responsibility for the attacks”. If that were the case, then we all know that Deccan is the provincial capital of Hyderabad, not the Hyderabad in Pakistan but the one in India! Furthermore, authentic investigative and intelligence-briefed findings show that there is no such “jihadi” organization by this name, which furthermore proves that this was another hoax.
  • One Indian channel went as far as broadcasting “real time videos” of a particular “Rehman chacha” (Rehman uncle) hailing from Faridkot district, Pakistan. Reportedly, the attackers had called him from their SIMs and taken further instructions… This is indeed appaludable, for one of the largest news channels in Pakistan, Express News, did extensive thorough findings in search of this person and found out there wasn’t anyone with such a name who ever belonged to Faridkot.
  • The Indian Govt. then again changed her statement and said it was a particular “Amir Jamal” from Faridkot. Again, the Express News team went on research and found out that this very man had died 3 years ago! His own kin related the event to the news team.
  • And again… now the Indian Govt. says it was a particular “Amir Kasab”… we’ll see what develops regarding another sham like this.
  • Some sources revealed on Pakistani media that they were “surprised” at they themselves not knowing of the fact that during all the tragedy in Mumbai, the Jewish settlement at ‘Nariman House’ was also loaded with MI5, Mossad and FBI agents. Furthermore, a handful of CIA agents were also among those dead at the Taj Hotel and were also present at the Oberoi Palace. As we move on, we came to know that the international Jewish terror organization “Chabad Lubavitch”, was also based at Nariman House. The question is: What were the reasons and circumstances under which agents of the MI5, Mossad, FBI, CIA and Chabad Lubavitch were resident in India? Are the Israelis who lived there in that much need of security?
  • The next day, the beneficiaries of all these events, the Hindu right-wing extremist parties such as the BJP, RSS, Vishwa Prashad, etc. get more active in fostering anti-Pakistan, anti-Muslim sentiments among Hindu nationals. The BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) played the forefront role, it even had highly-sentimental nationalistic and anti-Pakistan, anti-Muslim statements and banners printed in various leading Indian newspapers and magazines. All this seems to have benefited them a lot. Obviously, the Indian media and the Global Eye before was focused towards some of their members infiltrating the Indian Army’s hierarchy and infusing racist ideologies in them. They got the perfect chance to “turn the tables over”.
  • India pinpointed names of 3 terrorists to the Pakistan Govt. The names were of “Tiger” Memon (Mushtaq Abdur Razzaq Memon), Daud Ibrahim and Mas’oud Azhar. The former two are themselves Indian nationals, it is senseless to claim that they “perpetrated these acts from Pakistan” when the ISI and Govt. have repeatedly said they are not here. Mas’oud Azhar is a religious activist from Bahawalpur who is accredited for the establishment of the jihadi organization “Jaish e Muhammad”.
  • The American Govt. then, as expected, showed sympathy for the Indian Govt. and has recently sent a list of “terrorists” to be reviewed and approved by the U.N. Security Council. Among the names are 4 of the top-ranking former Director Generals of the ISI (Pakistan). And most notable among them is Lt. Gen. (R) Hameed Gul. The purpose and intent is obvious: The Zionists and Neocons in the American Govt. along with their Hindu counterparts want to corner and malign Pakistan’s ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) from all sides. In a half-hour exclusive interview to Geo News’ program “Crisis Cell” dated Nov. 4, 2008, Hameed Gul said that the reason the American Govt. and India is behind him is because he always spoke out in advance about the recent upcoming plans of Zionists and Indian Govt. against Pakistan. The question: Hameed Gul was a good friend of Milt Bearden of CIA and had good communication with the American Govt. (in cooperative terms) during his serving tenure, then why is he being blamed also? I hint its because of him being a devoted Muslim who believes in the policies of “true Islamic jihad” and who is known to be quite indulged in religion. He is known to support the just and true Islamic government that was just being formed by the genuine Taliban before it got purposely and timingly demolished by the U.S. Hameed Gul has also repeatedly spoken in detail about the various covert/overt plots that India’s R.A.W. and Israel’s Mossad are churning up in collaboration with each other. Is this a plot to silence him up?
  • Now during all this mayhem, the Zionists wage their propaganda in line with what they used to threaten the Iranian Govt. Issues are being raised whether Pakistan’s nuclear assets are safe or not. To this, one of Pakistan’s top nuclear scientists, Dr. Samar Mubarakmand, replied that indeed Pakistan’s assets are 100% safe by the Grace of Allah and can never be detonated accidentally, as they are protected by a very complex secret code. This shows how the Indian Govt. and the American Zionists are propagandizing against Pakistan.
  • On December 5, 2008, Russia and India signed a “Joint Nuclear Cooperation Treaty”. PM Manmohan Singh of India had this to say (basic excerpts):

“Russia and India will work together to bring forth an International Order… we shall work together in (nuclear) research and development”

Pakistani policemen stand guard in Karachi in November 2008. ...

Indian Media reported the first of these steps involved Russia setting-up a nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu.

One wonders: Why all this now? Was it pre-planned? It seems so. But we still don’t know.

One thing we are sure of is that this time, for real and directly head-on, the Zionists en par with their Indian counterparts including Israelis at the background are very desperate to malign, destabilize and eventually ‘abolish’ the ISI. Which, Insha’Allah, they never can.

Written by

Monday, 08 December 2008 02:27

Still Preparing To Attack Iran, The Neoconservatives In The Obama Era

Posted in Iran, USA with tags , , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground

By Robert Dreyfuss

What, exactly, does Barack Obama’s mild-mannered choice to head the Department of Health and Human Services, former Sen. Tom Daschle, have to do with neocons who want to bomb Iran?

A familiar coalition of hawks, hardliners, and neoconservatives expects Barack Obama’s proposed talks with Iran to fail ­ and they’re already proposing an escalating set of measures instead. Some are meant to occur alongside any future talks. These include steps to enhance coordination with Israel, tougher sanctions against Iran, and a region-wide military buildup of U.S. strike forces, including the pre-positioning of military supplies within striking distance of that country.

Once the future negotiations break down, as they are convinced will happen, they propose that Washington quickly escalate to warlike measures, including a U.S. Navy-enforced embargo on Iranian fuel imports and a blockade of that country’s oil exports. Finally, of course, comes the strategic military attack against the Islamic Republic of Iran that so many of them have wanted for so long.

It’s tempting to dismiss the hawks now as twice-removed from power: first, figures like John Bolton, Paul Wolfowitz, and Douglas Feith were purged from top posts in the Bush administration after 2004; then the election of Barack Obama and the announcement Monday of his centrist, realist-minded team of establishment foreign policy gurus seemed to nail the doors to power shut for the neocons, who have bitterly criticized the president-elect’s plans to talk with Iran, withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, and abandon the reckless Global War on Terrorism rhetoric of the Bush era.


“Kinetic Action” Against Iran

When it comes to Iran, however, it’s far too early to dismiss the hawks. To be sure, they are now plying their trade from outside the corridors of power, but they have more friends inside the Obama camp than most people realize. Several top advisers to Obama ­ including Tony Lake, UN Ambassador-designate Susan Rice, Tom Daschle, and Dennis Ross, along with leading Democratic hawks like Richard Holbrooke, close to Vice-President-elect Joe Biden or Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton ­ have made common cause with war-minded think-tank hawks at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), and other hardline institutes.

Last spring, Tony Lake and Susan Rice, for example, took part in a WINEP “2008 Presidential Task Force” study which resulted in a report titled “Strengthening the Partnership: How to Deepen U.S.-Israel Cooperation on the Iranian Nuclear Challenge.” The Institute, part of the Washington-based Israel lobby, was founded in coordination with the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and has been vigorously supporting a confrontation with Iran. The task force report, issued in June, was overseen by four WINEP heavyweights: Robert Satloff, WINEP’s executive director, Patrick Clawson, its chief Iran analyst, David Makovsky, a senior fellow, and Dennis Ross, an adviser to Obama who is also a WINEP fellow.

Endorsed by both Lake and Rice, the report opted for an alarmist view of Iran’s nuclear program and proposed that the next president set up a formal U.S.-Israeli mechanism for coordinating policy toward Iran (including any future need for “preventive military action”). It drew attention to Israeli fears that “the United States may be reconciling itself to the idea of ‘living with an Iranian nuclear bomb,'” and it raised the spurious fear that Iran plans to arm terrorist groups with nuclear weapons.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with consultations between the United States and Israel. But the WINEP report is clearly predisposed to the idea that the United States ought to give undue weight to Israel’s inflated concerns about Iran. And it ignores or dismisses a number of facts: that Iran has no nuclear weapon, that Iran has not enriched uranium to weapons grade, that Iran may not have the know-how to actually construct a weapon even if, sometime in the future, it does manage to acquire bomb-grade material, and that Iran has no known mechanism for delivering such a weapon.

WINEP is correct that the United States must communicate closely with Israel about Iran. Practically speaking, however, a U.S.-Israeli dialogue over Iran’s “nuclear challenge” will have to focus on matters entirely different from those in WINEP’s agenda. First, the United States must make it crystal clear to Israel that under no circumstances will it tolerate or support a unilateral Israeli attack against Iran. Second, Washington must make it clear that if Israel were indeed to carry out such an attack, the United States would condemn it, refuse to widen the war by coming to Israel’s aid, and suspend all military aid to the Jewish state. And third, Israel must get the message that, even given the extreme and unlikely possibility that the United States deems it necessary to go to war with Iran, there would be no role for Israel.

Just as in the wars against Iraq in 1990-1991 and 2003-2008, the United States hardly needs Israeli aid, which would be both superfluous and inflammatory. Dennis Ross and others at WINEP, however, would strongly disagree that Israel is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Ross, who served as Middle East envoy for George H.W. Bush and then Bill Clinton, was also a key participant in a September 2008 task force chaired by two former senators, Daniel Coats (R.-Ind.) and Chuck Robb (D.-Va.), and led by Michael Makovsky, brother of WINEP’s David Makovsky, who served in the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the heyday of the Pentagon neocons from 2002-2006. Robb, incidentally, had already served as the neocons’ channel into the 2006 Iraq Study Group, chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Representative Lee Hamilton. According to Bob Woodward’s latest book, The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008, it was Robb who insisted that the Baker-Hamilton task force include an option for a “surge” in Iraq.

The report of the Coats-Robb task force ­ “Meeting the Challenge: U.S. Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Development” ­ went far beyond the WINEP task force report that Lake and Rice signed off on. It concluded that any negotiations with Iran were unlikely to succeed and should, in any case, be short-lived. As the report put the matter, “It must be clear that any U.S.-Iranian talks will not be open-ended, but will be limited to a predetermined time period so that Tehran does not try to ‘run out the clock.'”

Anticipating the failure of the talks, the task force (including Ross) urged “pre-positioning military assets,” coupled with a “show of force” in the region. This would be followed almost immediately by a blockade of Iranian gasoline imports and oil exports, meant to paralyze Iran’s economy, followed by what they call, vaguely, “kinetic action.”

That “kinetic action” ­ a U.S. assault on Iran ­ should, in fact, be massive, suggested the Coats-Robb report. Besides hitting dozens of sites alleged to be part of Iran’s nuclear research program, the attacks would target Iranian air defense and missile sites, communications systems, Revolutionary Guard facilities, key parts of Iran’s military-industrial complex, munitions storage facilities, airfields, aircraft facilities, and all of Iran’s naval facilities. Eventually, they say, the United States would also have to attack Iran’s ground forces, electric power plants and electrical grids, bridges, and “manufacturing plants, including steel, autos, buses, etc.”

Palling Around With the Neocons

At a Nov. 6 forum at WINEP, Patrick Clawson, the erudite, neoconservative strategist who serves as the organization’s deputy director for research, laid out the institute’s view of how to talk to Iran in the Obama era. Doing so, he said, is critically important, but only to show the rest of the world that the United States has taken the last step for peace ­ before, of course, attacking. Then, and only then, will the United States have the legitimacy it needs to launch military action against Iran.

“What we’ve got to do is to show the world that we’re making a big deal of engaging the Iranians,” he said, tossing a bone to the new administration. “I’d throw everything, including the kitchen sink, into it.” He advocates this approach only because he believes it won’t work. “The principal target with these offers [to Iran] is not Iran,” he adds. “The principal target of these offers is American public opinion and world public opinion.”

The Coats-Robb report, “Meeting the Challenge,” was written by one of the hardest of Washington’s neoconservative hardliners, Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute. Rubin, who spent most of the years since 9/11 either working for AEI or, before and during the war in Iraq, for the Wolfowitz-Feith team at the Pentagon, recently penned a report for the Institute entitled: “Can A Nuclear Iran Be Deterred or Contained?” Not surprisingly, he believes the answer to be a resounding “no,” although he does suggest that any effort to contain a nuclear Iran would certainly require permanent U.S. bases spread widely in the region, including in Iraq:

“If U.S. forces are to contain the Islamic Republic, they will require basing not only in GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] countries, but also in Afghanistan, Iraq, Central Asia, and the Caucasus. Without a sizable regional presence, the Pentagon will not be able to maintain the predeployed resources and equipment necessary to contain Iran, and Washington will signal its lack of commitment to every ally in the region. Because containment is as much psychological as physical, basing will be its backbone.”

The Coats-Robb report was issued by a little-known group called the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC). That organization, too, turns out to be interwoven with WINEP, not least because its foreign policy director is Michael Makovsky. Perhaps the most troubling participant in the Bipartisan Policy Center is Barack Obama’s éminence grise and one of his most important advisers during the campaign, Tom Daschle, who is slated to be his secretary of health and human services. So far, Daschle has not repudiated BPC’s provocative report.

Ross, along with Richard Holbrooke, recently made appearances amid another collection of superhawks who came together to found a new organization, United Against Nuclear Iran. UANI is led by Mark Wallace, the husband of Nicole Wallace, a key member of Sen. John McCain’s campaign team. Among UANI’s leadership team are Ross and Holbrooke, along with such hardliners as Jim Woolsey, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and Fouad Ajami, the Arab-American scholar who is a principal theorist on Middle East policy for the neoconservative movement.

UANI is primarily a propaganda outfit. Its mission, it says, is to “inform the public about the nature of the Iranian regime, including its desire and intent to possess nuclear weapons, as well as Iran’s role as a state sponsor of global terrorism, and a major violator of human rights at home and abroad” and to “heighten awareness nationally and internationally about the danger that a nuclear-armed Iran poses to the region and the world.”

Barack Obama has, of course, repeatedly declared his intention to embark on a different path by opening talks with Iran. He’s insisted that diplomacy, not military action, will be at the core of his approach to Tehran. During the election campaign, however, he also stated no less repeatedly that he will not take the threat of military action “off the table.”

Organizations like WINEP, AIPAC, AEI, BPC, and UANI see it as their mission to push the United States toward a showdown with Iran. Don’t sell them short. Those who believe that such a confrontation would be inconceivable under President Obama ought to ask Tony Lake, Susan Rice, Dennis Ross, Tom Daschle, and Richard Holbrooke whether they agree ­ and, if so, why they’re still palling around with neoconservative hardliners.

Robert Dreyfuss, an independent journalist in Alexandria, Va., is a contributing editor at the Nation magazine, whose Web site hosts his “The Dreyfuss Report,” and has written frequently for Rolling Stone, The American Prospect, Mother Jones, and the Washington Monthly. He is the author of Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam.

Source :

Target Pakistan?

Posted in USA, War, Who is The Real Terrorist? with tags , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2008 by indonesiaunderground


The battle for Afghanistan and Iraq may be heading for stalemate and a quagmire. The Americans are now targeting Pakistan on almost a daily basis as unmanned drones crisscross into Pakistani territory and strike targets deep inside sovereign Pakistani airspace. While the Government in Islamabad keeps mum amidst allegations that they have allowed the Americans to strike inside Pakistan but do not have the courage to tell their people for fear of a certain political death.
For over seven years American and NATO forces are on the brink of a major military defeat and have squandered hundreds of billions of dollars worth of bombs and missiles on Afghanistan, needless to say many of which have wreaked havoc amongst poor ordinary Afghan citizens across the length and breadth of that nation. A strong re-emergent Taliban in Afghanistan under the leadership of Mullah Omar has now a grip on vast stretches of the territory and have denied the Afghan Government its writ.

Faced with a dangerous situation the Americans are now intensifying their attacks inside Pakistan which tantamount to a declaration of war and which is also prompting the threat of reprisals. A fact that is already evident from the increase in attacks on supply convoys that pass through Pakistan to keep the American led campaign in the so-called war on terror.

With all that in mind one has to question why India is now beatings its drums of war after what was clearly a massive Indian Maritime and security failure to prevent a bunch of young men armed with AK 47 Assault rifles. New Delhi blamed Pakistan. The initial knee jerk response from the Indian media about Pakistani involvement has polluted the air and obscured the truth. Many here are convinced that the group has an internal Indian dimension to it and may even be staged by the Hindu right wing BJP party which has been spitting venom against the Muslims and is directly involved in the massacre of thousands of Muslims in Gujarat State, besides covering up the role of extremist Hindu groups who have now been able to penetrate the Indian intelligence and military setup.

Islamic fundamentalism may be one thing but extremist Indian groups like the RSS, Shive Sena and the larger BJP is for all to see and gauge. So what are we to make of it and why is India now bent upon demanding the handover of 20 people that India alleges are involved in destabilizing that country. A list that goes back to 1981 and includes even Sikh freedom fighters who were at the time struggling for the independence of their homeland Khalistan. But India is not the main worry. For the people of Pakistan it appears the worst may be yet to come and there are apprehensions even in concerned quarters that Americans and even the Israelis are shaping un alliance or what is now called a nexus to target Pakistan.

Written by

Monday, 08 December 2008 17:30