The NYT’s journalistic obedience

BY GLENN GREENWALD

Earlier today, I wrote in detail about new developments in the case of Raymond Davis, the former Special Forces soldier who shot and killed two Pakistanis on January 27, sparking a diplomatic conflict between the U.S. (which is demanding that he be released on the ground of “diplomatic immunity”) and Pakistan (whose population is demanding justice and insisting that he was no “diplomat”). But I want to flag this new story separately because it’s really quite amazing and revealing.

In this Jan. 28, 2011 file photo, Pakistani security officials escort Raymond Allen Davis, a U.S. consulate employee, center, to a local court in Lahore, Pakistan.

Yesterday, as I noted earlier, The Guardian reported that Davis — despite Obama’s description of him as “our diplomat in Pakistan” — actually works for the CIA, and further noted that Pakistani officials believe he worked with Blackwater. When reporting that, The Guardiannoted that many American media outlets had learned of this fact but deliberately concealed it — because the U.S. Government told them to: “A number of US media outlets learned about Davis’s CIA role but have kept it under wraps at the request of the Obama administration.”

Now it turns out that The New York Times — by its own shameless admission — was one of those self-censoring, obedient media outlets. Now that The Guardian published its story last night, the NYT just now published a lengthy article detailing Davis’ work — headlined: “American Held in Pakistan Shootings Worked With the C.I.A.” — and provides a few more details:

The American arrested in Pakistan after shooting two men at a crowded traffic stop was part of a covert, C.I.A.-led team of operatives conducting surveillance on militant groups deep inside the country, according to American government officials. . . . Mr. Davis has worked for years as a C.I.A. contractor, including time at Blackwater Worldwide, the controversial private security firm (now called Xe) that Pakistanis have long viewed as symbolizing a culture of American gun slinging overseas.

But what’s most significant is the paper’s explanation for why they’re sharing this information with their readers only now:

The New York Times had agreed to temporarily withhold information about Mr. Davis’s ties to the agency at the request of the Obama administration, which argued that disclosure of his specific job would put his life at risk. Several foreign news organizations have disclosed some aspects of Mr. Davis’s work with the C.I.A.. On Monday, American officials lifted their request to withhold publication, though George Little, a C.I.A. spokesman, declined any further comment.

In other words, the NYT knew about Davis’ work for the CIA (and Blackwater) but concealed it because the U.S. Government told it to. Now that The Guardian and other foreign papers reported it, the U.S. Government gave permission to the NYT to report this, so now that they have government license, they do so — only after it’s already been reported by other newspapers which don’t take orders from the U.S. Government.

It’s one thing for a newspaper to withhold information because they believe its disclosure would endanger lives. But here, the U.S. Government has spent weeks making public statements that were misleading in the extreme — Obama’s calling Davis “our diplomat in Pakistan” — while the NYT deliberately concealed facts undermining those government claims because government officials told them to do so. That’s called being an active enabler of government propaganda. While working for the CIA doesn’t preclude holding “diplomatic immunity,” it’s certainly relevant to the dispute between the two countries and the picture being painted by Obama officials. Moreover, since there is no declared war in Pakistan, this incident — as the NYT puts it today — “inadvertently pulled back the curtain on a web of covert American operations inside Pakistan, part of a secret war run by the C.I.A. ” That alone makes Davis’ work not just newsworthy, but crucial.

Worse still, the NYT has repeatedly disseminated U.S. Government claims — and even offered its own misleading descriptions –without bothering to include these highly relevant facts. See, for instance, its February 12 report (“The State Department has repeatedly said that he is protected by diplomatic immunity under the Vienna Convention and must be released immediately”); this February 8 article (referring to “the mystery about what Mr. Davis was doing with this inventory of gadgets”; noting “the Pakistani press, dwelling on the items in Mr. Davis’s possession and his various identity cards, has been filled with speculation about his specific duties, which American officials would not discuss”; and claiming: “Mr. Davis’s jobs have been loosely defined by American officials as ‘security’ or ‘technical,’ though his duties were known only to his immediate superiors”); andthis February 15 report (passing on the demands of Obama and Sen. John Kerry for Davis’ release as a “diplomat” without mentioning his CIA work). They’re inserting into their stories misleading government claims, and condescendingly summarizing Pakistani “speculation” about Davis’ work, all while knowing the truth but not reporting it.

Following the dictates of the U.S. Government for what they can and cannot publish is, of course, anything but new for the New York Times. In his lengthy recent article on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, NYTExecutive Editor Bill Keller tried to show how independent his newspaper is by boasting that they published their story of the Bush NSA program even though he has “vivid memories of sitting in the Oval Office as President George W. Bush tried to persuade [him] and the paper’s publisher to withhold the eavesdropping story”; Keller neglected to mention that the paper learned about the illegal program in mid-2004, but followed Bush’s orders to conceal it from the public for over a year — until after Bush was safely re-elected.

And recently in a BBC interview, Keller boasted that — unlike WikiLeaks — the Paper of Record had earned the praise of the U.S. Government for withholding materials which the Obama administration wanted withheld, causing Keller’s fellow guest — former British Ambassador to the U.N. Carne Ross — to exclaim: “It’s extraordinary that the New York Times is clearing what it says about this with the U.S. Government.” The BBC host could also barely hide his shock and contempt at Keller’s proud admission:

HOST (incredulously): Just to be clear, Bill Keller, are you saying that you sort of go to the Government in advance and say: “What about this, that and the other, is it all right to do this and all right to do that,” and you get clearance, then?

Obviously, that’s exactly what The New York Times does. Allowing the U.S. Government to run around affirmatively depicting Davis as some sort of Holbrooke-like “diplomat” — all while the paper uncritically prints those claims and yet conceals highly relevant information about Davis because the Obama administration told it to — would be humiliating for any outlet devoted to adversarial journalism to have to admit. But it will have no such effect on The New York Times. With some noble exceptions, loyally serving government dictates is, like so many American establishment media outlets, what they do; it’s their function: hence the name “establishment media.”

UPDATE: From a few people in comments (and via email), there are several objections/dissents to some of the arguments here. My responses to them are here.

UPDATE II: At his news conference last week, this is what President Obama said about the Davis situation:

With respect to Mr. Davis, our diplomat in Pakistan, we’ve got a very simple principle here that every country in the world that is party to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations has upheld in the past and should uphold in the future. And that is if — if our diplomats are in another country, then they are not subject to that country’s local prosecution.

This is how the New York Times characterized that statement: “Without describing Mr. Davis’s mission or intelligence affiliation, President Obama last week made a public plea for his release.”

It’s one thing for a newspaper to withhold information because it genuinely believes its publication will endanger lives (and I’d love to hear the explanation about why this would). But this situation goes far beyond that. The NYT was regularly printing government claims like the one above (“our diplomat in Pakistan”) which were at best misleading and likely false, and also including their own misleading claims in these stories (“the mystery about what Mr. Davis was doing with this inventory of gadgets”). But they had information in their possession — and concealed it — which undermined (if not entirely negated) the truth of these statements.

There’s a big difference between simply withholding information to protect lives and actively enabling and publishing misleading propaganda. More to the point, there is simply no justification — none — for a newspaper to allow government officials to run around misleading the public, and to print those misleading statements, all while concealing information (at the Government’s request) which reveal those claims to be factually dubious.

OUR DIPLOMAT IN PAKISTAN

By Ahsan Waheed
ZoneAsia-Pk“

Our diplomat in Pakistan’ was how President Obama described Raymond Davis now uncovered as a member of a covert CIA team operating under cover inside Pakistan. The disclosure came after his cover was blown by British media and a gag order on US media that was to have facilitated Davis’ extradition under diplomatic immunity was lifted because it no longer served any purpose.

The United States Department of State issues a Diplomatic Identity Card to all diplomats accredited to the US. This is what the card says front and back:

Read Complete Article Here: http://www.zoneasia-pk.com/ZoneAsia-Pk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3673:our-diplomat-in-pakistan&catid=70:free-talk&Itemid=84

US Media Defends Zardari, Attacks Geo And Judiciary

This is a new chapter in US meddling in Pakistani politics.

By AHMED QURAISHI | Thursday, 21 October 2010.
WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM

WASHINGTON, DC-If you want evidence the US media has been mounting a quiet campaign over the past year in support of embattled Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari and against his critics in the media and Pakistan’s Supreme Court, read this report: Pakistan’s Media Piles On President, published by Washington Post and focused on Pakistan’s largest newspaper and television network, The News and Geo.

The above report is an indirect but strong criticism of Geo and of anyone in Pakistan critical of Mr. Zardari. The fact that such one-sided and biased reporting can appear in Washington Post shows there are power centers in Washington that take any attack against the incumbent Pakistani government very personally. And, as shown later here, this report is part of a pattern.

I broke the story at PakNationalists.com in Dec. 2009 about a secret meeting between then-US ambassador Anne Patterson and two senior politicians from an opposition party in a farmhouse on the outskirts of the Pakistani capital, the exact time of the meeting and the middle(wo)men who arranged it. Apparently the ambassador left the embassy in an unmarked car, no security cars trailing her, and met the two senior politicians for one purpose: to request them to avoid destabilizing the government of President Zardari. In return she offered US support for the two politicians and their party. [The two politicians politely asked for time to think about it and didn't commit to anything]. This was one of several similar meetings Ms. Patterson had with a limited number of opposition politicians at the time for the same purpose. None of them were reported or publicly acknowledged.

The point is, regardless of how many times US officials say they are sickened by Pakistani government’s corruption, they are firmly behind this government. Certainly there is a debate inside Washington on the utility of Mr. Zardari and whether he’s an asset or a burden for the US. But it’s quite obvious which viewpoint is dominating. The generous US flood aid after initial reluctance to send helicopters, and financial support in other areas, are all meant to shore up Mr. Zardari’s government. Washington came to Mr. Zardari’s rescue when it became clear his government was teetering before an emboldened military and an agitated public opinion.

Interestingly, the WashPost reporter omitted a significant piece of information: the siege of the headquarters of The News and Geo in Karachi in August. When Mr. Richard Holbrooke paid a visit to Jang offices, the parent company of The News and Geo, on Sept. 15, his gesture was largely symbolic. There never was a strong and equivocal condemnation of the government-sponsored harassment that Jang received after covering president’s UK visit. Even the article written by former US ambassador to Pakistan Wendy Chamberlin, defending Geo, made indirect references to US grievances over ‘conspiracy theories’ in Pakistani media, a euphemism now for anything critical of US policy in Pakistan.

The best part of the WashPost report is that it gives itself the right to decide the good protagonists and bad protagonists in Pakistani politics.

For example, in the same report, the reporter paints Mr. Zardari’s government as a helpless victim of unnecessary media criticism. A portion of the report is dedicated to proving the young age of most Pakistani journalists, implying they are immature. The American reporter summarily dismisses several Pakistani media accounts of government-linked feudal politicians playing a role in worsening flood impact in Sindh. At one point, the WashPost reporter creates the illusion that Mr. Zardari is responsible for the growth in independent media in Pakistan.

On Geo’s role in criticizing Mr. Zardari, the reporter sarcastically observes that “Geo is not a political opposition group, but rather Pakistan’s most popular television network.”

The WashPost reporter then goes on to make this skewed remark, “Whether this is a healthy free press at work or a destabilizing force in a tense and turbulent democracy is the subject of much debate.”

Really?

It’s amazing that the mainstream US media is now deciding how the Pakistani media should conduct itself. I guess it’s a natural follow-up to US politicians and think-tank types deciding who should rule Pakistan and who shouldn’t, and who should be the designated enemy of Pakistan and who isn’t. In blaming the Americans, we also blame ourselves, our political and military rulers who emboldened foreigners to meddle in our affairs.

This WashPost report is not one-off but underscores a trend in the US media over the past one year when it comes to Pakistan and the government of President Asif Zardari.

Just a week earlier, the same theme was discernible in the story, Pakistan’s Emboldened Judiciary Threatens Government Stability, also published by the Washington Post on 13 Oct. 2010. Two different reports in Washington DC’s newspaper of record, harping on the same theme: that Pakistan’s media and judiciary are destabilizing the government and democracy.

ISI on Taliban’s Board of Directors, What About Indian Airforce Molestor Deported From Israel?

Music Teacher Molests A Girl In A Florida Indian Temple For Four Years, But That’s Not News Because He Is Not A Pakistani!

You Heard About Indian Air Force Officer Deported By Israel For Molesting A Kid? Neither Did I

A music teacher masturbated and forced his female student to have sex with him. This happened inside the South Florida Hindu Temple for four years. The student is 14 now and testified in court on Tuesday . Semen splatter has been found by the police inside the Hindu temple.

When the girl’s family tried to go public with this, the Indian community forced them to keep the scandal under wraps, shunning the girl and her family.

If this was a case involving a Pakistani, even if there was a hint of Pakistani involvement, like maybe the Indian music teacher traveled to Karachi en route to the Himalayas, this news would have been on CNN, Fox and BBC. But since it involves an Indian, the US media will give it a pass.

This is not an issue of religion. Deviants are found in all religions. It’s an issue of how the Am-Brit media selectively treats stories that impact government’s foreign policy priorities.

For example, in keeping with the official Washington policy of elevating India as a future power, the Am-Brit media won’t cover the story of an Australian preacher burned alive with his two young boys by an Indian religious mob. But when the professors of London School of Economics decide to become Inspector Gadgets and release a ridiculous ‘I-hate-you’ report against ISI and the Pakistani military, it is accorded maximum space by the Am-Brit news media because it simply suits current Am-Brit policies.

[See the original story here: Music Teacher Found Guilty Of Sexually Molesting Girl In Hindu Temple ]

So you can get away with a lot these days if you’re an Indian offender facing the Am-Brit media [a.k.a. the "international media"].

Take for example the case of the Indian Air Force officer deported by Israel last year for molesting a 6-year-old. I consider myself a new junkie and I have plenty of junkies like me in our PakNationalists team who scour the news as a hobby and yet I never heard of this story until today.

While the Am-Brit media pushed this news under the rug, the Indian Express covered the story and linked it to the reports of Indian peacekeepers in Africa found involved in child prostitution:
But the story that takes the cake for how the Am-Brit news media is totally motivated and often passes biases for analysis and news is the following story.

“This is the first time that an official from the IAF has been charged with attempting to abuse a child during a foreign posting. In the past, soldiers from the Indian Army posted at a peacekeeping mission in Congo have been investigated and found guilty for child abuse by the United Nations. A UN report revealed last year indicted Indian Peacekeepers posted in Congo for child abuse and paying minor Congolese girls in North Kivu for sex in 2007 and earlier this year.”

When 69 Pakistanis were burned alive aboard the so-called Peace Train as it traveled through India, BBC’s Jill McGivering, like most Am-Brit corresponds, pinned the blame on Pakistan and Kashmiri freedom groups.

Read these two fascinating paragraphs written by Ms. McGivering:
Even in her analysis, BBC’s Ms. McGivering was convinced that the perpetrators were Pakistanis and that the high number of dead Pakistanis was probably a blunder on the part of the attackers who aimed at ‘a different target’ like maybe Hindu Indians.

“The prime suspects might be groups such as Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, the main Islamic militant groups who have been blamed for many high-profile bombings. Recent attacks on Delhi, Mumbai and Varanasi, for example, seemed designed to damage India’s image abroad and stoke anti-Pakistan feeling inside India. But the fact that so many of the dead on the train were Pakistani Muslims may indicate that the devices were intended for a different target, or exploded prematurely.”

Of course, in 2008, three serving Indian military intelligence officers were arrested and charged with planning and executing the terrorist act. A Hindu terror group was also indicted as having helped the three Indian officers.

But did the BBC or Ms. McGivering apologize for their wrong information and wrong analysis?

No.

Did the BBC and the rest of the Am-Brit media highlight the nexus between Indian intelligence and Hindu terror groups?

No.

By Ahmed Quraishi

Times Square, NY: A Muslim Saved Lives, But You Won’t Hear It On US Media

One Muslim tried to bomb Times Square. But another Muslim, from Senegal, is the hero who averted a disaster by his quick action. Isn’t that news? It is. But you won’t hear it in the US media because the organized demonization campaign by vested interests in Washington seeks to convince US public opinion that US should launch and expand a war inside Pakistan. This is a comment by an American-Indian community leader.

By ENVER MASUD
The Wisdom Fund.
WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM

WASHINGTON, D.C.-The name of the alleged perpetrator of the New York, Times Square bombing plot had barely hit the news headlines, when Muslim “leaders” began mouthing the usual platitudes.

TRIAL OF CONCIENCE OR MOCKERY?

Dr Aafia: Media miss shock, horror, drama …

Yvonne Ridley

New York : Dr Aafia Siddiqui is a bright, intelligent woman who has been through hell having being kidnapped, tortured in secret prisons, gunned down by US soldiers and renditioned to America where she is now facing attempted murder charges against those who shot her .

Only in the cock-eyed crosshairs of George W Bush’s War on Terror could this happen and I hope to God that the jurors who will go through the evidence during the next few hours, if not days, see through this rotten legacy and recognise the case for what it is … a tissue of lies enveloped in a web of deceit.

The last seven years of Dr Aafia’s life could have been penned by a Hollywood scriptwriter, but instead all the folk from Tinsel Town could come up with was the rather tame blockbuster movie Rendition starring Reese Witherspoon.

But several days ago those of us following the case closely were given a glimpse into the dark, mysterious world in which Dr Aafia has been forced to live since 2003.

And more importantly the details were relayed in a hushed court not by any lawyer, but by the only person qualified to talk with any authority about dark prisons, interrogations and abuse – the account relayed to the courtroom in Manhattan, New York came from the mouth of Dr Aafia herself.

Running for more than two weeks there’s been little or no record in the Western media of this shocking case other than some of the most ill-informed, embarrassingly skewed reports which indicate the noble profession of journalism is still in a narcotic malaise in the Big Apple.

That the New York Times had to apologise to its readers on the front page for selling them short on the build up to and the unfolding war in Iraq, one would have thought would have had an impact on the quality of future output.

That the US press corps, with the exception of The Baltimore Sun, had to play catch up after ‘missing’ the Abu Ghraib scandal speaks volumes.

Sadly it seems that huge swathes of the US media have learned nothing.

Just a few days ago an embarrassing wealth of riches in terms of soundbites which would have had most journalists salivating like a Pavlov Dog came tumbling out in the lower Manhattan court.

But like a gaggle of bald men fighting over a comb, the scribes present in the main courtroom could only focus on one irrelevant detail … Dr Aafia Siddiqui had fired a pistol at a gun club. Excuse me? This is America … where half the adult population live in houses where guns are kept. Let’s keep it real – America has 80 million gun owners with a total of 258 million guns.

Possibly the most wronged woman in the entire War on Terror had just revealed how she was held in secret prisons, with no legal representation, cut off from the outside world since 2003 where brutal interrogation techniques were used to break her down. And, to make matters even worse when she was kidnapped from her home city in Karachi, Pakistan her three children were also snatched … the fact two of those children are American citizens held no sway with the majority of the assembled press corps. One wondered if their pants had caught fire if they would have even smelled the smoke.

And so what held the Western media attention? Well, it transpired that Dr Aafia may have taken a pistol shooting course as part of her curriculum in an American university. That’s a bit like an American tourist ordering fish and chips and a cup of tea on arrival in Britain. Hold the front page!

So for your benefit, let me tell you about the real “shock, horror, drama” that you won’t read in the New York Times or the rest of the corporate media.

After two weeks of being baited and defamed, in a calm, articulate and precise manner Dr Aafia Siddiqui finally had her day – and her say – in court.

It should have been a moment of schadenfreude for the prosecution team as they prepared to sit back and enjoy the spectacle of the defendant rant and rave like a mad woman when she decided on her right to take the stand.

Perhaps Judge Richard Berman, a modest little man with much to be modest about, must have thought his rather unremarkable legal career would finally make more than just the current footnote in Wikipedia.

Most of her own legal team watched mortified in the belief that their reluctant client (she had dismissed them publicly many times to no effect) might destroy the robust defence they had built over two weeks.

Even her brother Muhammad, who has sat in court everyday watching and listening to the proceedings told me he wondered if his little sister was making the right decision.

Given the chance, I think I would have also advised her against speaking.

Well thank goodness Dr Aafia ignored us all – within minutes of giving evidence the prosecution wanted to shut her up, Judge Berman looked like he was sucking on the bitterest of lemons and the rest of the courtroom sat back aghast.

The Pakistan media, despatched into one of the two overspill rooms frantically scribbled down their notes so as not to miss one single word and her supporters sat back aghast watching a breathtaking spectacle.

One of the few community leaders who has been outstandingly vocal in his support, El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan, probably expressed himself better than any of the nitwits sleeping on the press benches when he wrote: “She testified that after completing her doctorate studies she taught in a school, and that her interest was in cultivating the capabilities of dyslexic and other special needs children.

“During this line of questioning, the monstrous image that the government had carefully crafted (with considerable support from mainstream media) of this petite young woman, had begun to be deconstructed. The real Dr Aafia Siddiqui – the committed muslimah, the humanity-loving nurturer and educator, the gentle yet resolute mujahid for truth and justice – began to emerge with full force”.

As the evidence continued we learned that she didn’t know where her three children were – it was sensational content. She talked of her dread and fear of being handed back to the Americans when she was arrested in Ghazni and was held by police.

Terrified that yet another secret prison was waiting for her she revealed how she peaked through the curtain into the part of the room where Afghans and Americans were talking, and how when a startled American soldier noticed her, he jumped up and yelled that the prisoner was loose, and shot her in the stomach. She described how she was also shot in the side by a second person. She also described how after falling back onto the bed in the room, she was violently thrown to the floor and lost consciousness.

This ties in exactly with what I was told by the counter terrorism police chief I interviewed in Afghanistan back in the autumn of 2008 – I remember him laughing as he told me how the US soldiers panicked, shot and most of them ran out of the room in a panic. Hmm, no wonder the prosecution didn’t want him giving evidence in court.

Instead they chose to record his interview and voiced it over with a shoddy translator who has a long distance relationship with the Pashtu language … defence team take note. Demand a real Pashtu translation because what was given out in court was misleading and not the words of the actual words of police chief – don’t take my word for it … speak to someone whose first language is Pashtu. it’s hardly rocket science.

Of course there’s no way a bunch of soldiers are going to admit they lost it, but according to those I interviewed for my film In search of Prisoner 650 in Afghanistan that’s exactly what happened.

But let’s return to Aafia and the cross examination which followed. When questioned on whether she had ever done any work with chemicals, her response was, “only when required.”

As Mauri remarked: “This opening line of questioning was significant for its prejudice producing potential in the minds of jurors. While Aafia is not being charged with any terrorism conspiracy counts, the threat of terrorism has been the pink elephant in the room throughout this troubling case!”

The prosecutor attempted to draw a sinister correlation between Aafia and her now ex-husband being questioned by the FBI in 2002, and leaving the US a week later. Aafia noted that there wasn’t anything sinister about the timing; they had already planned to make that trip home before the FBI visit. To underscore this point, she noted how she later returned to the US to attempt to find work in her field.

Mauri said one of the most heart-wrenching moments in the cross-examination was when Dr Aafia described how she was briefly re-united with a young boy in Ghazni (July 2008) who could have been her oldest son. She spoke of how she was mentally in a daze at that time, and had not seen any of her children in five years. As a result she could not definitively (then or now) determine if that was indeed her son, Ahmed.

When asked whether she had incriminating documents in her possession on the day she was arrested, Aafia testified that the bag in her possession on the day that she was re-detained was given to her. She didn’t know what was in the bag, nor could she definitively determine if the handwriting on some of the documents was hers or not. She also mentioned on a number of occasions (to the chagrin of the prosecutor) how she was repeatedly tortured by her captors at Bagram.

But the killer blow was delivered when Dr Aafia mildly challenged the prosecutor in a calm, crystal clear voice that was heard throughout her testimony: “You can’t build a case on hate; you should build it on fact!”

There were other sensation moments and revealing testimony and if anyone thought that she hated Americans she removed that idea from their minds when she talked of the “fake Americans, not real Americans” who held and tortured her in the secret prisons. They were fake, she explained because real Americans would not behave in such a way to bring shame on their country.

We also discovered how she was instructed to translate and copy something from a book while she was secretly imprisoned. During the course of this testimony which repeatedly drew the ire of an increasingly frustrated prosecutor, Aafia noted how she can now understand how people can be framed (for crimes they are not guilty of).

It all got too much for Judge Berman who ordered a brief recess.

The plan to goad and incite Dr Aafia to perform some incomprehensible, demonic rant had back-fired.

When testimony resumed, we learned through the star witness how she was often forced-fed information from one group of persons at the secret prison, and then made to regurgitate the same information before a different group of inquisitors. While it was presented to her as a type of “game,” she revealed of how she would be “punished” if she got something wrong.

Now, more than ever, this trial should be brought to an end. And if Judge Berman wants to go down in history for punctuating his lack lustre career as a member of the judiciary for standing up in the cause of truth and justice now is the time to do it.

The truth will out and the US Government’s case has been exposed for what it is … a sham.

And it is a fitting tribute to the endurance of Dr Aafia, mother-of-three, that the sham has been exposed by her.

Let’s see justice being carried out in 500 Pearl Street in lower Manhattan tomorrow. Over to you, your Honour Judge Berman.

Award-winning investigative Yvonne Ridley and award-winning film-maker Hassan al Banna Ghani produced the documentary In Search of Prisoner 650 about the mysterious Grey Lady of Bagram who they conclude is Dr Aafia Siddiqui. Yvonne Ridley is also a patron of the human rights organisation Cageprisoner which first raised the issue of Dr Aafia Siddiqui shortly after she went missing in March 2003. A full report on the court proceedings can be seen on the website www.cageprisoners.com

What Robert Gates Didn’t Say – And US Media Hides – About Blackwater In Pakistan

Two Pakistani employees of an American defense contractor engaged by the US Embassy in Islamabad have been linked to two attacks on Pakistani military and the assassination of a Brigadier. If this is not alarming, then consider that US Ambassador Anne Patterson’s name has come up in an investigation where thousands of dollars were paid in bribes to Interior Ministry to smuggle illegal weapons into Pakistan. Not to mention how Washington is empowering India in Afghanistan at Pakistan’s cost. When Pakistan takes countermeasures, US officials like Mr. Gates and Mr. Holbrooke accuse Pakistan of ‘anti-Americanism’ and harassing US diplomats. Time for some straight talk.

By AHMED QURAISHI
Saturday, 23 January 2010.
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan-US Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted during an interview with a Pakistani TV station that Blackwater [now 'Xe International'] and DynCorp are operating in Pakistan. Immediately after the statement, Pentagon tried to put a spin on his words.

But US meddling inside Pakistan -by posting private US defense contractors under diplomatic cover of the US embassy – is a reality for most Pakistanis. Some of these Americans have been caught disguised as Taliban right in the heart of Islamabad. Some Pakistanis were manhandled by some of these American militiamen on the streets of at least two Pakistani cities in recent months.

Since Pakistan is not Iraq or Afghanistan despite all the US direct and indirect misinformation, these US covert operators were arrested on several occasions.

The mainstream US media continues to keep the good American people and the world opinion in the dark about this. But this is probably one of the biggest untold stories in America’s war on terror. This is about United States trying to put boots on the ground inside Pakistan through the help of a pro-US government in Islamabad that shares [or at least key figures in it] the US objective of containing and limiting the ability of Pakistan’s military to influence the country’s foreign policy. This is about Pakistan wanting to keep an independent foreign policy versus Pakistan blindly serving US policy on Afghanistan, India and China.

Mr. Gates tried to put a gloss on this US covert meddling when , ‘Well, they’re [Blackwater and DynCorp] operating as individual companies here in Pakistan, in Afghanistan and in Iraq.’

Not true. The truth is that the issue is so serious that, according to Pakistani investigators, US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson is a suspect in a case of bribes amounting to little over US $ 270,000 paid by DynCorp in 2009 to senior officials at the federal Interior Ministry in Pakistan. The money went in exchange for allowing illegal weapons into Pakistan to be used by private US defense contractors without informing the country’s security departments and intelligence agencies. Ms. Patterson personally lobbied Pakistani officials for this concession to DynCorp. She even wrote a letter to Pakistani officials, followed by a letter by her Deputy Head of Mission Mr. Gerald Feierstein, asking Pakistani Interior Ministry officials to issue permits for weapons to be used by DynCorp in the ‘entire territory of Pakistan.’ The US ambassador is directly linked to the probe, which has resulted in the arrest of a key aide to Pakistan’s Minister of State for the Interior. But the government of President Zardari will not dare allow Pakistani investigators to pursue US Ambassador’s role in the scandal. A key question in the probe is how the US Embassy and DynCorp allowed the cargo of illegal weapons into Pakistan. According to one lead, a huge cache of weapons reached a Pakistani tribal leader on Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan, who in turn wrote to the Interior Ministry announcing he was ‘gifting’ the weapons to a Pakistani subcontractor of DynCorp.

Incidents like this and others raised alarm bells inside Pakistani security departments and the intelligence community. In effect, key figures in President Zardari’s government were found to have given approval for the entry of a large number of US citizens into Pakistan for ‘official US government business’ without explaining what that is. When Pakistani authorities tried to get to the bottom of how private US defense contractors ended up inside Pakistan in large numbers and what they were exactly doing here, US officials and media launched what appears to be a media trial of Pakistan, accusing the country of ‘harassing’ US diplomats and denying visas to them because of alleged anti-Americanism.

The unwillingness of the Zardari government to confront Washington and Pakistan’s generally weak media outreach skills allowed Washington to pain this as a case of anti-Americanism fueled by war on terror.

‘Conspiracy theories’ is another label that US officials and media have increasingly used recently as a cover to hide serious violations of diplomatic norms and sovereignty involving undercover private US operatives inside Pakistan.

This is how the Wall Street Journal tried to delegitimize serious Pakistani concerns raised during Mr. Gates’ visit in a report filed from Islamabad whose opening line read as follows, ” U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is overseeing wars with Sunni militants in Iraq and Taliban fighters in Afghanistan. In Pakistan, he’s facing a different foe: the pervasive conspiracy theories that fuel widespread anti-American feelings here.”

The truth is that there are no conspiracy theories but real events, reported and documented, that raise questions over US political, diplomtic, and covert meddling inside Pakistan. Here is a list:

1. NUCLEAR ESPIONAGE : In July 2009, four US ‘diplomats’ were arrested inside the maximum security perimeter around Pakistan’s premier nuclear facility at Kahuta. They failed to tell Pakistani investigators what they were doing there and how they managed to slip through the security checkpoints in the area. US Embassy intervened to rescue the four ‘diplomats’ after almost three hours in detention, citing diplomatic immunity. President Zardari’s government refused to let Pakistani security authorities press charges.

2. SUSPICIOUS CONDUCT: On Oct. 6, 2009, Pakistani police arrested two Dutch diplomats roaming the streets of Islamabad without a number plate carrying advanced weapons. Pakistani police were surprised when security personnel from the US Embassy reached the scene to rescue the Dutch. The Americans used their contacts within the Zardari government to get everyone released. Later, Pakistan Foreign Office summoned US and Dutch diplomats for a private meeting over the incident. But the Pakistani government refused to demand a public explanation from US and Dutch diplomats despite recommendations from police and security officials.

3. FACILITATING INDIAN ACTIVITIES: In this high profile case in May 2009, a US diplomat arranged a small meeting between an Indian diplomat and several senior Pakistani federal government officials at a private house. The invited Pakistanis worked in civilian positions, including one with access to Prime Minister’s Office. It appeared that the US diplomat was basically facilitating the Indian to meet senior officials who otherwise would be inaccessible for him. Pakistan Foreign Office took serious exception to the meeting, publicly reprimanded the Pakistani officials who attended the meeting but stopped short of seeking explanation from the US embassy. According to Pakistani investigators, for a US diplomat to indulge in facilitating possible espionage linked to an Indian diplomat was a matter of grave concern. It also fitted with the US policy of exercising tremendous pressure on the pro-US government in Islamabad to give concessions to India at the expense of Pakistani strategic interests.

4. COVERT US MILITIAS IN THE HEART OF PAKISTAN: In September 2009, undercover US agents were found to have recruited a total of 100 former elite Pakistani military commandos to create rapid-intervention teams for unknown purposes. A 100 more were under training at a secret facility camouflaged as a workshop on the outskirts of the Pakistani capital when it was raided by Pakistani police. It turned out that DynCorp was training the men. US Ambassador Anne W. Patterson brought DynCorp to Pakistan by telling Pakistani officials that the private defense contractor would provide security to embassy buildings. But she never explained why DynCorp was secretly raising private militias on Pakistani soil without informing the Pakistani government or military or the intelligence agencies. Some of those who were under training at the time of the raid said that DynCorp focused on recruiting retired officers who had links and contacts within the Pakistani military and could glean information from their sources. [ See video and pictures ]

5. PUSHY US DIPLOMATS: The US Embassy in Islamabad has made it its business to mount pressure on owners of Pakistani newspapers to curtail or expel columnists and commentators critical of US policy. Of special target are those who expose how US Embassy is meddling in Pakistani affairs and expanding the US footprint inside Pakistan. Last year, Ambassador Patterson sent a letter to one of the largest Pakistani media groups accusing a columnist of endangering American lives and succeeded in pushing her out. The US Embassy is also recruiting opinion makers within the Pakistani media, academia and military in order to promote the US agenda even at the cost of Pakistani interests, dismissing critics as ‘conspiracy theorists’ and accusing them of anti-Americanism. A senior Pakistani journalist Syed Talat Hussain exposed US activities in the following words , ” Pro-American lobby in Pakistan is growing in direct proportion to the scaling up of suspicions about the US. The main task of this lobby is to reduce the complexity of the US’s objectives towards Pakistan to romantic levels of trust (…) A motley crew of former diplomats, retired generals, socialites, slick civil society begums, self-styled analysts, businessmen, journalists, and now also lawyers – they are the darlings of the US embassy staff. They are the instruments of positive outreach and public diplomacy that US diplomats are so keen to expand in Pakistan.”

6. HARASSING PAKISTANIS: Private US security contractors, or militiamen, have been involved in at least three incidents registered by the Pakistani police where armed Americans physically assaulted unarmed ordinary Pakistanis in public places. In one case, the nephew of a senior member of President Zardari’s own government was manhandled and locked up in the toilet of a gas station by men described as armed military-looking civilian Americans.

7. RESISTING POLICE CHECKS: In at least five incidents, US ‘diplomats’ disguised as Taliban, complete with beards and Pashto language skills, were stopped at several police checkpoints in Islamabad and Peshawar. In some cases, these American ‘diplomats’ tried to speed through police barriers. In one recent case, this resulted in a brief police chase, where a Pakistani officer dragged the US ‘diplomats’ back to the police picket and forced the Americans to apologize to Pakistani police officers. Again, no charges were pressed because these private US agents carried diplomatic passports.

8. ENGINEEING DOMESTIC POLITICS: As recently as December 2009, US ambassador in Islamabad was found meeting senior Pakistani politicians at private homes of mutual friends in unannounced meetings restricted to 3 to 4 persons. The ambassador asked her guests to publicly support the embattled pro-US President Zardari. US diplomats in Islamabad and officials in Washington have been blatantly interfering in Pakistani politics. In addition to helping form the incumbent coalition government in Islamabad, made up of pro-US parties, US officials have been busy trying to save both Mr. Zardari and his key political adviser and ambassador to Washington Husain Haqqani. US officials in Washington have been briefing sympathetic US journalists about this. In one case, columnist Trudy Rubin had this to say while discussing Pakistan in an article published last month: “Here is the first piece of good news: Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari seems to have weathered a campaign by opponents, including the military, to force him out of office. Zardari has deep flaws, but his ouster would have hampered efforts to fight the jihadis. So would the removal, now averted, of Pakistan’s effective ambassador to Washington, Husain Haqqani, whom the Pakistani military had unfairly blamed for conditions that Congress imposed on aid to Pakistan.”

9. BRIBES AND ILLEGAL WEAPONS: This case is stunning because of the direct involvement of US Ambassador Anne W. Patterson in lobbying for DynCorp. The company ended up bribing Interior Ministry officials to smuggle banned weapons into Pakistan and then went on to raise private militias and hire retired Pakistani military officers to run rapid deployment teams and possibly even spy on the Pakistani military.

10. DEMONIZATION OF PAKISTAN: Since 2007, US officials and US media has systematically demonized Pakistan worldwide, creating false alarm over Pakistan’s strategic arsenal. US officials and media have also pushed to bracket Pakistan along with Iraq and Afghanistan in order to justify a possible military intervention. When Pakistan resisted US meddling recently, US media again went on rampage, accusing Pakistan of ‘anti-Americanism’ and harassment of US diplomats. Additionally, there has been a marked increase of lectures and studies by US think-tanks inviting unknown separatist individuals and groups to speak and fan ethnic separatism inside Pakistan and theorize on the breakup of the country.

11. ABETTING TERROR INSIDE PAKISTAN: The suspicions about why DynCorp was secretly raising private militias inside the federal Pakistani capital almost turned real when a suspect in the attack on the Pakistani military headquarters in October 2009 was allegedly found to have been recruited by DynCorp. In a second case, another suspected DynCorp recruit was found involved in assassinating a senior Pakistani military officer as he drove to work. In other words, two Pakistani employees of a US defense contractor engaged by the US embassy have been linked to two terrorist attacks on the Pakistani military. Add to this that Pakistan’s military and intelligence are a favorite punching bag for the United States and its allies, like India and Britain, and the picture of what the US is doing in Pakistan becomes even more disturbing.

These points explain how ill-motivated the US complaints about delaying visas and alleged anti-Americanism in Pakistan are. This is what US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Mr. Holbrooke and Mr. Gates are loath to share with the American people and the world public opinion.

Nuclear rogue states

H WAHEED

Both the Indian and US media have been quite vocal in the recent past, voicing concerns about Pakistan’s nuclear programme. In some bizarre incidents, we have witnessed that the nuclear safeguards of both the nations have been under regular breach.

Let me recall US nuke incidents. A sensitive list of US nuclear sites was mistakenly posted on the Internet, and in another case that shocked the whole world, a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown for more than three hours across several US states. As far as Indian nukes are concerned, a few days back a fire accident left two people dead at India’s main nuclear research laboratory, the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) in Mumbai.

Times of India reported on November 30, 2009 about radiation contamination at the Kaiga nuclear plant in Karnataka. The locals residing in surrounding area suffered the consequences. Another case was the sudden disappearance of a top nuclear scientist L Mahalingam – with access to sensitive information – who was later found dead. Two to three tons of water leaked out of an atomic reactor in western India on August 5, 1981. An examination of the safety record in India’s nuclear facilities reveals poor practices and routine accidents, ranging from leaks of oil to complete loss of power in a reactor, causing all safety systems to be disabled.

Such a series of blunders places the US and India in the list of the world’s most dangerous nuclear powers. Pakistan has no such history since Pakistan’s nuclear command and control system remains one of the most sophisticated and secure in the world. Hats off for the unsung heroes of our nuclear assets.

HARPOONING THE HARPOON

Ghalib Sultan

By a strange coincidence whenever there is going to be legislation on aid or arms sales to Pakistan the US media throws a spanner in the works. This is done by either dredging up the nuclear proliferation issue or coming up with something new. This time it is the idea that Pakistan has modified the US supplied HARPOON sea to sea missile for sea to land attack and has extended its range. Pakistan should be happy to note that it is credited with such technology innovation capabilities but unfortunately the US media is also sometimes a vehicle for indirectly disseminating US official thinking.

That is not all. The US is also the happy hunting ground for various lobbies and the one that has worked against Pakistan is the Israeli-American Jewish and the Indian lobby. India would be at the heart of any such endeavor. There is also the money factor that works so well in Washington DC with lobbyists all over the landscape.

Read Complete Article : HARPOONING THE HARPOON

Threatening Iran

By Paul Craig Roberts | Counterpunch

When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Japan did not spend years preparing her public case and demonstrating her deployment of forces for the attack. Japan did not make a world issue out of her view that the US was denying Japan her role in the Pacific by hindering Japan’s access to raw materials and energy.

Similarly, when Hitler attacked Russia, he did not preface his invasion with endless threats and a public case that blamed the war on England.

These events happened before the PSYOPS era. Today, America and Israel’s wars of aggression are preceded by years of propaganda and international meetings, so that by the time the attack comes it is an expected event, not a monstrous surprise attack with its connotation of naked aggression.

The US, which has been threatening Iran with attack for years, has passed the job to Israel. During the third week of July, the American vice president and secretary of state gave Israel the go-ahead. Israel has made great public disclosure of its warships passing through the Suez Canal on their way to Iran. “Muslim” Egypt is complicit, offering no objection to Israel’s naval forces on their way to a war crime under the Nuremberg standard that the US imposed on the world.

By the time the attack occurs, it will be old hat, an expected event, and, moreover, an event justified by years of propaganda asserting Iran’s perfidy.

Israel intends to dominate the Middle East. Israel’s goal is to incorporate all of Palestine and southern Lebanon into “Greater Israel.” The US intends to dominate the entire world, deciding who rules which countries and controlling resource flows.

The US and Israel are likely to succeed, because they have effective PSYOPS. For the most part, the world media follows the US media, which follows the US and Israeli governments’ lines. Indeed, the American media is part of the PSYOPS of both countries.

According to Thierry Meyssan in the Swiss newspaper Zeit-Fragen, the CIA used SMS or text messaging and Twitter to spread disinformation about the Iranian election, including the false report that the Guardian Council had informed Mousavi that he had won the election. When the real results were announced, Ahmadinejad’s reelection appeared to be fraudulent.

Iran’s fate awaits it. A reasonable hypothesis to be entertained and examined is whether Iran’s Rafsanjani and Mousavi are in league with Washington to gain power in Iran. Both have lost out in the competition for government power in Iran. Yet, both are egotistical and ambitious. The Iranian Revolution of 1979 probably means nothing to them except an opportunity for personal power. The way the West has always controlled the Middle East is by purchasing the politicians who are out of power and backing them in overthrowing the independent government. We see this today in Sudan as well.

In the case of Iran, there is an additional factor that might align Rafsanjani with Washington. President Ahmadienijad attacked former President Rafsanjani, one of Iran’s most wealthy persons, as corrupt. If Rafsanjani feels threatened by this attack, he has little choice but to try to overthrow the existing government. This makes him the perfect person for Washington.

Perhaps there is a better explanation why Rafsanjani and Mousavi, two highly placed members of the Iranian elite, chose to persist in allegations of election fraud that have played into Washington’s hands by calling into question the legitimacy of the Iranian government. It cannot be that the office of president is worth such costs as the Iranian presidency is not endowed with decisive powers.

Without Rafsanjani and Mousavi, the US media could not have orchestrated the Iranian elections as “stolen,” an orchestration that the US government used to further isolate and discredit the Iranian government, making it easier for Iran to be attacked. Normally, well placed members of an elite do not help foreign enemies set their country up for attack.

An Israeli attack on Iran is likely to produce retaliation, which Washington will use to enter the conflict. Have the personal ambitions of Rafsanjani and Mousavi, and the naive youthful upper class Iranian protesters, set Iran up for destruction?

Consult a map and you will see that Iran is surrounded by a dozen countries that host US military bases. Why does anyone in Iran doubt that Iran is on her way to becoming another Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, in the end to be ruled by oil companies and an American puppet?

The Russians and Chinese are off balance because of successful American interventions in their spheres of influence, uncertain of the threat and the response. Russia could have prevented the coming attack on Iran, but, pressured by Washington, Russia has not delivered the missile systems that Iran purchased. China suffers from her own hubris as a rising economic power, and is about to lose her energy investments in Iran to US/Israeli aggression. China is funding America’s wars of aggression with loans, and Russia is even helping the US to set up a puppet state in Afghanistan, thus opening up former Soviet central Asia to US hegemony.

The world is so impotent that even the bankrupt US can launch a new war of aggression and have it accepted as a glorious act of liberation in behalf of women’s rights, peace, and democracy.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

Are Muslims Europe’s new Jews?

By Shireen M Mazari

In Europe the façade of tolerance and secular “liberalism” is so well maintained it is easy to be fooled into believing this is the reality. In fact there is an insidious social compact between the media, ruling elites and the white Christian majority to sustain this façade at all times. That is why the murder of Marwa el-Sherbini, the Egyptian Muslim lady in Dresden, Germany – simply because she wore a hijab – barely found a mention in the European press and the US media saw no reason to create a fuss. Of course had it been the murder of a Jewish lady specifically for displaying her cultural/religious Jewishness, the western media would have gone to town crying foul and the German government would have been put fairly and squarely in the dock.

The murder came shortly after French President Sarkozy gave his “secular” fatwa against the burqa and it seems that now there is open season on hijab-wearing Muslims in some parts of Europe – those parts that ironically see themselves as being more tolerant and “liberal”. In fact European secular “liberalism” is being defined increasingly in terms of non-acceptance of the new multi-religious and multi-ethnic Europeans by the old white Christian Europeans. When European leaders display this characteristic in public statements, it gives leeway to the racist bigotry that still pervades in Europe – only now the Muslims have replaced the Jews as the bête noirs.

In fact the case of Marwa el-Sherbini is frightening because her only “crime” was that she wore the hijab. A year before her murder, a 28 year old man of Russian origin had insulted her by calling her a “terrorist” and “Islamist whore” for wearing a hijab when she asked him to let her son sit on a swing. At the time the man had been found guilty of abusing and insulting Marwa and had been fined 780 Euros. But he had appealed which is why the parties were all present in a Dresden court room when the gruesome murder took place in full view of Marwa’s husband and her three-year old son Mustafa. As Marwa, pregnant, was in the dock recalling the incident, the accused walked across the courtroom and plunged a knife into her 18 times. What is even more horrific is that as her husband, Elvi Ali Okaz, ran to save her he, too, was brought down, shot by a police officer who declared that he mistook him for the attacker. Can anything be more ridiculous? Two serious issues arise: One, why was a man known to be violently disposed towards Ms Marwa Sherbini allowed to walk into the courtroom with a lethal knife? Two, how could the policeman have mistaken her husband for the attacker when he moved much later and separately – or was the attacker not taken into custody when he had begun his attacks? Why was he allowed to stab Marwa 18 times? Where was the same policeman and why did he not shoot at the accused when he was stabbing the lady?

Whichever way one looks at it, the acceptable racism cannot be denied – both at the official and unofficial levels. The German government’s only reaction was to sweep it all under the carpet. There was a shameful silence on the part of all the “liberals” and human rights activists who are so ready to condemn the misdeeds of Muslim extremists anywhere in the world. Ironically, apart from the Central Council of Muslims’ leadership, it was the Central Council of Jews General Secretary, Stephan Kramer who decried the “inexplicably sparse” reaction of the media and German politicians. After all, the Jews of Europe know only too well that it begins with one incidence after another and, if one remains silent, the victimisation becomes collective.

Does that not make one wonder if Muslim women in hijab are now going to be targeted with impunity by extremists, racists and others of the lunatic fringe in Europe? Why has the EU leadership not condemned this act of religious hatred? Is Marwa el Sherbini going to be the first of many headscarf martyrs – as her native Egyptian media is calling her – of Europe, especially in the wake of the Sarkozy statement? It would be a pity if the grand tradition of French freedom and equality is reduced to a superficiality covering an underlying intolerance towards cultural and religious diversity.

Perhaps the most shameful has been the reaction of the Muslim World including Pakistan. Why have we seen no official condemnation when we see the EU leaders and their media waste no time in issuing condemnatory statements whenever any incident of a crime against women or religious minorities occurs in Pakistan? It is good that they seek to act as our conscience on these occasions, but there has to be reciprocity and we should not shy away from acting as their conscience when they lose their way or shy away from exposing such crimes! Interestingly, there was a very high-powered electronic media delegation that had gone on the German government’s invitation to Berlin around this time. So why was this issue not raised? In fact, as a protest the delegation should have given up this summer freebie or at least have given the case due publicity at home. When we can – and rightly so – take strong issue with the flogging of women by the Taliban, can we not also condemn the equally vile act of murder committed by a secular or Christian extremist? Or does a crime against a woman in hijab or against the “Taliban” not move our public in quite the same way – especially our elite?

After all look at our silence on the mass murder of Taliban prisoners by that murderous warlord Rashid Dostum – and ally of the US after 9/11. Even President Obama is hesitant to take too strong a stand in this issue and we seem to be least bothered to raise it widely in our media. Why? Are we now accepting the double standards and hypocrisy of the west in terms of human rights – so that the killing of certain types of Muslims is more acceptable outside of the bounds of law?

As long as we remain selective about condemning violence and crimes against women, whomsoever they are and wherever they are, we will have little credibility to our protest. After all, the crimes of the Baloch sardars in burying women alive, or the Tumandars of southern Punjab cutting off the noses of women or the Sindhi feudals setting dogs on women to kill them are as horrific as the Taliban crimes against women – and they happen with as regular a frequency. And now this new wave of crimes against our Muslim sisters in Europe simply because they choose to wear hijab is no less despicable. So where are our voices now?

Of course, in terms of our leadership, one has no expectations given the bizarre statements coming from that quarter whether it is relating to the US in Afghanistan – “what the US does in Afghanistan is its own business, it is a sovereign state”, implying that the US can continue to wreak havoc on Pakistan through Afghanistan – or the rise of the Taliban. Apart from being hazy on the facts, no leader makes admissions of past covert policies whatever they may have been – especially when his Party was so deeply involved in these policies, as General Babar had once admitted! If nothing else, the many Yanks he deals with should at least tell him how the US to date has never even admitted to any CIA killings, let alone so many other covert deeds of horror at the level of the Presidency!

This is not to say that we should not recognise our mistakes and learn from them rather than repeating them over and over again. But our leaders do not have to make it a habit to go through a full confessional especially when being interviewed by the foreign media. One can alter direction without yelling and screaming just to prove one’s loyalty to, at best, a dubious foreign ally.

But looking beyond our hapless leadership and before we become the next victims of European history, the nation should ask why it continues to be part of an apathetic Muslim Ummah?

The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com

Pakistan and the US media…

By Fatima Rizvi

It is surprising how paranoid or maybe anti-Pakistan the US media, especially the NYT, has become. Not that other media displays much professionalism or understanding of the issues when it comes to reporting incidents. The electronic media is even worse. Let me explain a few facts here:

A bus with green (government) license plates was recently attacked and six employees of a nuclear facility killed. The bus was attacked at least 30-35 kilometres away from Kahuta on a busy main road in Rawalpindi. Although it turned out to be carrying KRL (Khan Research Laboratories) employees there were no markings on the bus to suggest as to which organization it belonged to. The standard recognition for buses or other vans or cars used for transportation of Government Employees/Semi Govt organization employees in Pakistan is the GREEN number plates these carry as opposed to the white/black number plates for private vehicles.

Read Complete Article : Pakistan and the US media…

American desperation

Ahmed Quraishi

The latest scare story on Pakistan’s nukes is a breath of fresh air. Instead of the unnamed sources, which have been the basis for the anti-Pakistan demonisation campaign in the US media, this time we have no less than President Obama’s point man on South Asia, Mr Bruce Riedel, coming out with an op-ed that leaves little mystery in the debate over whether Washington is exploiting terrorism to target Islamabad’s nuclear weapons arsenal.

Mr Riedel is one of the key proponents of the theory that the Pakistani military needs to be transformed into a little more than a glorified local police force watching out for US interests. It is pointless to counter the arguments of such determined imperialists who are shamelessly interfering in Pakistan. What is more important at this stage is to understand how our supposed ally has taken us for a ride and how we need to exploit the new American desperation in the region to get a better deal than the one currently in hand.

There is a growing body of evidence that the US is supporting terrorism in our region to further its strategic objectives. In Iran, a secretive sectarian group is trying rally the people of Iran’s Sistan-Baluchistan province for secession from Tehran. In Pakistan’s Balochistan, an ethnic group has risen from the dead to campaign for secession. The only thing common to both groups is that they emerged after the US landed in Afghanistan and turned that poor country into a source of region-wise destabilisation. So much for fighting terror.

The Pakistani military has also admitted over the weekend what Pakistan’s pro-US government has been hiding for months. The weapons that the terrorists – the fake Pakistani Taliban – are using to kill Pakistanis are coming primarily from the US and India. The Pakistani military leadership first confronted Adm Mullen and CIA Deputy Director Stephen Kappes about this in a secret meeting in Rawalpindi last July. As in all insurgencies, the terrorists in our northwestern belt are a mix of local elements bolstered by professional fighters from US-controlled Afghanistan. The Pakistani military has squeezed these terrorists so hard now that there is little doubt where the support for this anti-Pakistan terror campaign is coming from. To avoid embarrassment, Washington quickly ‘leaked’ a story that US weapons meant for the Afghan army have reached insurgents. The timing of the leak conveniently coincides with the Pakistani army catching the American double game pants down.

Some members of the Karzai puppet regime have privately confirmed to Pakistani officials that they are incapable of stopping Indian terrorist activities on Afghan soil.

None of this will stop unless Pakistan firmly puts the leash on CIA outposts inside Pakistan. There is no question that the CIA and Pakistani spy agencies were allies during the 1980s. But let us not forget that the CIA station in Pakistan recruited twelve insiders and used them to plan sabotage from within before being busted by chance in 1978.

Now the US strategic interest in the region is largely divergent from that of Pakistan’s. US officials, like Mr Riedel, have little respect or appreciation for Pakistan’s right to have its own national security perspective and not rely on US think tanks to adopt one. Today, Pakistan is paying for the blank check that our government and intelligence agencies gave the Americans on the ground in Balochistan and the tribal belt.

America is desperate in Afghanistan. US officials have launched a fresh charm offensive to pacify the alienated Pakistanis. A panicked and bankrupt Washington is also trying to scare Asia into doling out money to save America’s failed occupation in Afghanistan. This is the time for Islamabad to demand Washington cease all the propaganda about Pakistan’s nukes, about the fabled ten billion dollars in aid, and stop turning the world against Pakistan. The elected government needs to muster some guts to confront Washington on this instead of leaving all the tough talk to Pakistani military leadership.

There is a golden opportunity out there to put a leash on CIA activities in Pakistan which we had consented to after 9/11. The American goal posts have shifted. Pakistan is no longer bound by the same deal.

The writer works for Geo TV. Email: aq@ahmedquraishi.com

American desperation

Ahmed Quraishi

The latest scare story on Pakistan’s nukes is a breath of fresh air. Instead of the unnamed sources, which have been the basis for the anti-Pakistan demonisation campaign in the US media, this time we have no less than President Obama’s point man on South Asia, Mr Bruce Riedel, coming out with an op-ed that leaves little mystery in the debate over whether Washington is exploiting terrorism to target Islamabad’s nuclear weapons arsenal.

Mr Riedel is one of the key proponents of the theory that the Pakistani military needs to be transformed into a little more than a glorified local police force watching out for US interests. It is pointless to counter the arguments of such determined imperialists who are shamelessly interfering in Pakistan. What is more important at this stage is to understand how our supposed ally has taken us for a ride and how we need to exploit the new American desperation in the region to get a better deal than the one currently in hand.

There is a growing body of evidence that the US is supporting terrorism in our region to further its strategic objectives. In Iran, a secretive sectarian group is trying rally the people of Iran’s Sistan-Baluchistan province for secession from Tehran. In Pakistan’s Balochistan, an ethnic group has risen from the dead to campaign for secession. The only thing common to both groups is that they emerged after the US landed in Afghanistan and turned that poor country into a source of region-wise destabilisation. So much for fighting terror.

The Pakistani military has also admitted over the weekend what Pakistan’s pro-US government has been hiding for months. The weapons that the terrorists – the fake Pakistani Taliban – are using to kill Pakistanis are coming primarily from the US and India. The Pakistani military leadership first confronted Adm Mullen and CIA Deputy Director Stephen Kappes about this in a secret meeting in Rawalpindi last July. As in all insurgencies, the terrorists in our northwestern belt are a mix of local elements bolstered by professional fighters from US-controlled Afghanistan. The Pakistani military has squeezed these terrorists so hard now that there is little doubt where the support for this anti-Pakistan terror campaign is coming from. To avoid embarrassment, Washington quickly ‘leaked’ a story that US weapons meant for the Afghan army have reached insurgents. The timing of the leak conveniently coincides with the Pakistani army catching the American double game pants down.

Some members of the Karzai puppet regime have privately confirmed to Pakistani officials that they are incapable of stopping Indian terrorist activities on Afghan soil.

None of this will stop unless Pakistan firmly puts the leash on CIA outposts inside Pakistan. There is no question that the CIA and Pakistani spy agencies were allies during the 1980s. But let us not forget that the CIA station in Pakistan recruited twelve insiders and used them to plan sabotage from within before being busted by chance in 1978.

Now the US strategic interest in the region is largely divergent from that of Pakistan’s. US officials, like Mr Riedel, have little respect or appreciation for Pakistan’s right to have its own national security perspective and not rely on US think tanks to adopt one. Today, Pakistan is paying for the blank check that our government and intelligence agencies gave the Americans on the ground in Balochistan and the tribal belt.

America is desperate in Afghanistan. US officials have launched a fresh charm offensive to pacify the alienated Pakistanis. A panicked and bankrupt Washington is also trying to scare Asia into doling out money to save America’s failed occupation in Afghanistan. This is the time for Islamabad to demand Washington cease all the propaganda about Pakistan’s nukes, about the fabled ten billion dollars in aid, and stop turning the world against Pakistan. The elected government needs to muster some guts to confront Washington on this instead of leaving all the tough talk to Pakistani military leadership.

There is a golden opportunity out there to put a leash on CIA activities in Pakistan which we had consented to after 9/11. The American goal posts have shifted. Pakistan is no longer bound by the same deal.

The writer works for Geo TV. Email: aq@ahmedquraishi.com