Pakistan supplied American missiles to Taliban

[ECH1969]

US AND Nato forces are following up reports that the Taliban has received vital component parts for American shoulder-fired Stinger missiles from Pakistani officials enabling them to be used against helicopters in Afghanistan.

Western sources say they are not sure whether the supplies, needed to make the American-made missiles operational, were provided by rogue elements within the Pakistani secret service or approved at a high level.

However, the effect of rearming the Stingers could be to make Nato aircraft vulnerable at a time when Britain is carrying out the deployment of a force of almost 6,000 in southern Afghanistan.

US and Nato forces have carried out a series of searches along the border areas in the hunt for the missiles with one large-scale operation taking place a month ago.

http://www.india-defence.com/reports/1519

[FloridaPat]

1. Who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. I'm confused.

[leesa]

9. We sell missiles to everyone...we keep the wars going everywhere

Does THAT answer your question?

[lala_rawraw]

46. Let me help...

The Taliban is a creation of Pakistan's ISI (same as our CIA). There is no difference. In fact, I would argue that Pakistan is the most dangerous enemy we have. Certain "business" relationships have made sure that the ISI continues to traffic in guns, drugs, and WMD and they are largely responsible for proliferation in the Mid-East.

They train terrorists at the same facilities ISI officers are trained in. They house the Bin Laden bunch and the head of the ISI passed 100k to Atta (via Dubai) before resigning when the story broke. In addition, an ISI agent killed Dan Pearl, although he was "arrested" there has been no trial and no one really knows where he is. Pakistan's far right military/mafia complex is in bed with the Turkish military/mafia complex and so forth.

Hope that helps:)

[psychopomp]

65. Thanks for breaking it down

"There is no difference. In fact, I would argue that Pakistan is the most dangerous enemy we have."
-lala_rawraw

Controversial but perhaps true for the reasons you concisely stated.

[TheBaldyMan]

71. The Taleban are a result of the power vacuum left after the Soviet pullout

Al Qaida are a creation of MI6/CIA/ISI cooperation along with several other radical islamist groups that continue to be active globally.

Originally the Taleban were an organisation of radical theology students in the colleges around Kandahar. They came to prominance after the soviet withdrawl during the interregnum of warlords that tore Afghanistan up worse than it had ever been by the soviets. Most of the damage to Kabul took place during this phase of Afghani history, although almost untouched when the russians retreated across the border arond 40% of the city was destroyed by warlords vying for power during the next decade.

[wordpix2]

54. The New World Order execs run everything---big banks, military-industrial

-congressional complex, wealthy international elite investing in anything/everything that makes them more money and gives their world views more exposure---armaments, big oil, mines and media.

The rest of us are manipulated to stay out of New World Order elite's way or just watch TV/DVDs and be sheeple.

[heirs_of_liberty]

55. The 'bad guys' are ALL religious fascists of EVERY stripe!

BTW: Marxism is also a dogmatic, doctrinal establishable "religious" society, with Prophets, Bishops, Priests and Proselytisers every bit as evil, criminal, murderous and nefariously greedy as any noble privatist Cabal; fellow illiberal Conservativists with whom they are most commonly allied.

All that is not Liberty is Tyranny.

God is Love - not hatred!

[mom cat]

2. And America supplied American made missles to the Taliban.

[daleo]

8. But that was on the other side of the mirror

In mirror world, the Taliban are good.

[mom cat]

10. Is that "mirror" as in "smoke and mirrors"?

[daleo]

25. That, and a couple of other references

1 - Famous line from JFK (Oliver Stone) - "We are through the looking glass here, people", referring to the complicated assassination conspiracy that Oliver Stone is hypothesizing.

2 - Famous Star Trek episode "Mirror, mirror" - A transporter accident sends Kirk, Spock etc. into a parallel universe, where the good guys are bad and the bad guys are good.

So, Taliban were good before 1991, but are bad after 1991. The collapse of the Soviet Union being the mirror, I guess.

[heirs_of_liberty]

60. The CIA Mafia needed to manufacture a new enemy.

They already knew the Soviet Union was collapsing due to a "critical crisis of infrastructure" in 1978, and that their Eastern European Empire was in outright rebellion over the Polish Pope that had opened the long-closed Communist door to the feared, competing fascist socialism of Catholicism.

Robert Gates continued to misdirect and lie to the US Congress about their laughable, imaginary, "Godless" "Communist Menace", even as they were using the Cold War money they had been and continue to extort from US taxpayers to manufacture themselves a new "National Insecurity" by grooming arming and training Osama Bin Laden's Mujihadeen Menace and assist the nuclear armament and development of Muslim Nuclear arsenal in Pakistan, also hiding their knowledge of that from their MI6-CIA Mafia slaves in Congress.

There was pure evil on both sides of this mirror!

[wordpix2]

58. I met a Vietnam vet some years ago--he had a metal piece removed from

his skull that read, "Made in the USA." That's when I woke up to the fact that the robber baron armaments dealers deal everything to all sides. They have no loyalty to any nation, they are just out to make a profit and it doesn't matter what side the buyer is on. The armament maker and merchant really couldn't care less.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. Dunno how reliable this report is, but...

I wouldn't be surprised.

[IsItJustMe]

4. Pakistan may be bad actor. Their intentions are quit ambivalent.

[K-W]

50. What is ambivelent?

The Musharaaf regime will act in its own self-interest like all regimes. They are a selfish actor.

[amerikat]

5. What goes around comes around.

I'm not surprised.

[redirish28]

6. It will be interesting to see what type of spin is placed on this:

Does the US say the reports are lies and protect Pakistan?


or is Pakistan now an terrorist?

[LynnTheDem]

7. I keep on posting it... US's #1 enemy; PAKISTAN.

One successful assassination attempt between us & Pakistan's nukes.

But hey never mind.

[ronnie624]

12. I have seen the posts you refer to

and have often wondered about your meaning. Can you provide a link or two that might satisfy my curiosity?

[LynnTheDem]

14. Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean?

Is it the "one successful assassination attempt away" you mean? The dictator of Pakistan, bush's good pal "Mushie", has escaped -barely- 3 assassination attempts lately. The people of Pakistan hate his guts (and ours).

And when Mushie falls...

Which of course is why bush supports the dictator Mushie and doesn't mention democracy for Pakistan.

[ronnie624]

16. I assumed you had read something

somewhere that had led you to believe that certain elements within the Pakistani government would attack the U.S. with nuclear weapons if Purvez Musharef was assassinated. I was hoping you had an interesting essay or news story to share.

No offense was intended. I just take note of your posts as a potential source of information.

[LynnTheDem]

17. Ok gotcha. Lemme go dig some links out.

No offense taken; I just wasn't sure what exactly you wanted links to.

:)

[LynnTheDem]

20. links;

Pakistan bigger threat than N Korea: US expert
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0603/135.html

'Nuclear Pakistan more dangerous to US than Iraq'
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jan/07jafri.htm

Securing Pakistan's Nuclear Weapons Complex (David Albright)
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/terrorism/stanleypaper.html

Extremist, Nuclear Pakistan: An Emerging Threat?

Pakistani nuclear experts are under investigation for links with al-Qaeda. There is legitimate concern that President Pervez Musharraf's regime does not have full control over Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Pakistan is reported to have shared its nuclear technology with North Korea, and possibly with Myanmar and Saudi Arabia, thus contributing to the problem of nuclear proliferation.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-472es.html

al Qaeda in charge of Pakistan's nukes; soon as they get rid of the dictator currently in charge...

[ronnie624]

23. My thanks LynnTheDem. n/t

[cliss]

13. Me too, Lynne.

I keep repeating this fact: Here are the U.S.'s biggest enemies:

1) Pakistan

2) Saudi Arabia

[LynnTheDem]

15. The Top 2; bush's best buddies.

Where's the Taleban from?

Pakistan.

Where's OBL from?

Saudi Arabia.

Where were the 911 hijackers from?

Pakistan. Saudi Arabia. (And a token from Egypt.)

So who does bush attack? IRAQ. Who does bush wanna attack? IRAN.

What is bush? Stupidest MFer on the planet.

[cliss]

18. Agreed. There is an article on Counter Punch

titled "the Coming Fall of Pakistan". It's hair-raising in its implications. The author feels it's only a matter of time before Pakistan falls. Look at the last paragraph:

"The fall of Pakistan to militant Islam will be a strategic disaster greater than anything possible in Iraq, even losing an army. It will be a greater disaster than a war with Iran that costs us our army in Iraq. Osama and Co. will have nukes, missiles to deliver them, the best conventional armed forces in the Moslem world and an impregnable base for operations anywhere else. As North Korea's Dear Leader has shown the world, nobody messes with you if you have nukes. Uncle Sam takes off his battle rattle and asks Beijing, or somebody, if they can possibly sponsor some talks.

That ticking sound Mr. Bush hears is not Mr. Cheney's pacemaker. It's the crocodile, and he's getting rather close."

[LynnTheDem]

21. Tons of ME experts have been & still are saying "one bullet away"

But Mushie the dictator (hated by the vast majority of Pakistanis) is bush's bestest buddy...so never mind.

bush Cabal & all rightwingnuts; stupidest MFers on the planet.

[psychopomp]

68. Which alleged hijacker was from Pakistan?

I say "alleged" because, depending on the report, seven to nine are still alive:

http://www.welfarestate.com/911/
-referenced w/links in footnotes

Anyhow, the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon. Who was from Pakistan?

[Andromeda]

24. Exactly right.

I want to add that Iran and North Korea are "troublesome" now and could present greater threats in the future. Right now I think Iran is just making a lot of noise but doesn't have the capability yet to nuke the U.S.

That could change in the near future though.

[heirs_of_liberty]

41. Exactly right on!

Ever since the Gehlen-CIA Mafia's Raygun-twinkie President let his Christian Fascist Bush Sr master get our nation involved in plumbing hindreds of Billions of dollars to the radical madmen of Pakistan to manufcture their new "Muslin Menace" with which to continue and enhance their Cold War secret criminal militay industrial extortion of US taxpayers the Doomsday clock has been ticking.

These Christian Fascists secret neo-Nazi agenda of ensuring a Christian Book of Revelation global thermonuclear confrontation in and over Israel is running like a well-oiled hate machine fed daily by the atrocities of the illegal, criminal, unjustifiable murder of millions of innocent secular Iraqi's.

Our support for criminal, conservative Nazi Religious-Socialist regimes in Britain, Saudi Arabia and Iran is proof positive that this anti-semetic Gehlen-MI6-CIA Mafia Christian Socialist Fascism sought the development of the Muslim nuclear capabilities of Pakistan. Indeed the Raygun-twinkie CIA Mafia regime specifically hid the fact that they fully knew they were providing Pakistan the means and methods of acquiring and developng a nuclear arsenal yet deliberately hid this fact from Congress in order to manufacture Osama bin Ladin, and because they dearly and deeply want this nuclear capability to be used to trigger the global Armageddon the British Anglican Fascist Gehlen-MI6 Mafiosi set up by handing Israel ('60's) the vast nuclear arsenal the (nuclear armed) rest of the world will never, never ever allow it to get a chance to use!

This plan of fulfilling the "Christian" dogmatic socialist prophecy of "Revelation" (and exterminating the Jews the RIGHT way, in their twisted distorted Christianism-brainwashed skulls) is the only thing that they think will prove their Jesus-thingy is the true 'god'. (you know - the miserable old Hell-owning bastard with a pet named Satan who's 'son' is supposed to come back on doomsday?)

Someone forgot to tell these lunatic bastards that Jesus is a RABBI !!

[leftchick]

43. You are right on target Lynn

thank you for the reminder.

[robertpaulsen]

44. You're absolutely right, LynnTheDem.

I tried to show this in my paper American Judas. Here's a portion:



a. Inter Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) The ISI plays a much more significant role in the Pakistani government than do its counterparts in other countries. Time Magazine has noted, "Even by the shadowy standards of spy agencies, the ISI is notorious. It is commonly branded 'a state within the state,' or Pakistan's 'invisible government.'"

The ISI grew into its present form during the war between the Soviet Union and mujaheddin guerrillas in Afghanistan in the 1980s. The CIA thought the Afghan war could be Russia's own costly Vietnam War, and they funneled billions to the mujaheddin resistance to keep them a thorn in Russia's side. The strategy worked: Soviet soldiers withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, and the Soviet Union collapsed two years later, partly due to the costs of the war.

But the costs to keep the mujaheddin fighting were staggering, with estimates ranging between $6 billion and $40 billion. While a substantial portion of this amount came from the CIA and the Saudi Arabian government, who were both funneling the money through the ISI, much of the cost was deferred by Afghanistan's opium trade. Although the Afghan war has ended, the ISI has continued to profit from opium. In 1999, the United Nations Drug Control Programme estimated that the ISI was making around $2.5 billion annually from the sale of illegal drugs. The drug trade helped unite the ISI and Osama bin Laden, who was said to have taken a 15% cut of the Afghan drug trade money in exchange for protecting smugglers and laundering their profits. By 1994, the Taliban, a group of Muslim radicals studying in Pakistan, began conquering Afghanistan. The Taliban had been recruited by the ISI and molded into a fanatical force that conquered Afghanistan's capital by 1996. CNN reported, "The Taliban are widely alleged to be the creation of Pakistan's military intelligence . Experts say that explains the Taliban's swift military successes." The ISI didn't create the Taliban simply for strategic reasons; they shared the Taliban's extreme radical vision. As the Wall Street Journal remarked in November 2001, "Despite their clean chins and pressed uniforms, the ISI men are as deeply fundamentalist as any bearded fanatic; the ISI created the Taliban as their own instrument and still supports it."

The relationship between the US and the ISI is hard to fathom. On September 4, 2001, ISI Director Mahmood Ahmed arrived in Washington, D.C. On September 10, a Pakistani newspaper reported on the visit, saying that it had "triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council" as well as meetings with CIA Director George Tenet, unspecified officials at the White House and the Pentagon, and his "most important meeting" with Mark Grossman, US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. In May 2001, both CIA Director George Tenet and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage had visited South Asia. It's not known if they met with Mahmood or anyone else in the ISI, but according to credible news reports, Tenet had "unusually long" consultations with President Musharraf. It is also worth noting that Armitage is known for his "large circle of friends in the Pakistani military and ISI" as well as his connections to the Iran-Contra affair. On the morning of September 11, Lt. Gen. Mahmood was at a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with the chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Senator Bob Graham (D) and Representative Porter Goss (R). The meeting was said to have lasted at least until the second plane hit the World Trade Center. Goss is a self-admitted 10-year veteran of the CIA's clandestine operations wing. Goss and Graham were later the heads of the joint House-Senate investigation into the September 11 attacks, and Goss in particular made headlines for saying there was no "smoking gun" indicating that the government had sufficient foreknowledge to prevent the September 11 attacks.
(http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essaysaeed.html)

1) Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed - On October 7, 2001, Pakistani President Musharraf fired Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, the head of the ISI. The next day, some newspapers, mostly in India but also in Pakistan, shockingly said he was fired for his role in the 9/11 attacks. For instance, a Pakistani newspaper stated, "Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed has been replaced after the FBI investigators established credible links between him and Umar Sheikh, one of the three militants released in exchange for passengers of the hijacked Indian Airlines plane in 1999... Informed sources said there were enough indications with the US intelligence agencies that it was at Gen. Mahmood's instruction that Sheikh had transferred 100,000 US dollars into the account of Mohammed Atta..." In the US, surprisingly, the only mention was in a one short piece in the Wall Street Journal, mentioning that, "The US authorities ... confirm the fact that $100,000 wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the insistence of General Mahmood."
(http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essaysaeed.html)

2) Saeed Sheikh - He was born in Britain with the name Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh. In 1993 he emerged in Pakistan as a member of a militant group fighting for the liberation of Kashmir from India. Pakistan has been fighting India for years over control of Kashmir, and it appears Saeed was put on the ISI payroll around this time, to help the Pakistani cause in Kashmir. In 1994, Saeed began training at a training camp in Afghanistan. He soon was teaching the classes. He developed close ties with al-Qaeda while training there. By the end of the year he was known as Osama bin Laden’s "favored son" or "my special son." Even more curiously, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review suggested in March 2002, "There are many in Musharraf's government who believe that Saeed Sheikh's power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA. The theory is that ... Saeed Sheikh was bought and paid for."
(http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essaysaeed.html)

more...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=66773

[tabasco]

11. The Bush cabal trusted them to "guard the border."

The corporate cabal wanted on top of that Iraqi oil, so they could not spare any troops to catch the people who attacked New York City. As a result, we got a joke of a military operation, in which Pakistani troops were expected to apprehend their cousins fleeing across the border into Pakistan. Every American should be outraged.

[HuffleClaw]

19. erm, a rather biased source methinks.

'india-defence.com'?

[FormerOstrich]

22. Uhmm....

I'm pretty sure Reagan gave Usama a bunch of stingers when Usama was a freedom fighter and guest at the White House. Of course, maybe they ran out of those and had to depend on Pakistan.

[BrotherBuzz]

45. Some accounts say the stingers never physically left CIA operator's hands.

and other accounts say there are hundred of stingers still floating around but have dead batteries and whatnot. In any event, it looks like Pakistan is good to jump start the program by suppling those pesky little parts. Did we outsource 'Radio Shack' telephone order operations to Pakistan?

[closeupready]

26. Beware India's Pakistan-hating propaganda.

India wants Pakistan as a state to disappear - and that is not a recent thing. That has been true since Partition.

That so many otherwise intelligent people buy into the propaganda campaign is very disturbing.

No offense, but I'll be alarmed when I see stories from non-biased sources.

[closeupready]

27. Let me also point out that Pakistan's leaders have all been Western-orient

oriented - Bhutto; Sharif; and even Musharraf. That Pakistan helped contain communism when India was allying itself with the Soviet Union.

But again, Americans have short memories.

[The_Casual_Observer]

32. Saddam was pro western, as I remember

[closeupready]

35. Not as far as I know - he was secular, but not particularly pro-Western.

Even if he was, that would confirm the notion that we may not like the governments running these foreign countries, but instability may end at a higher price than what came before. In other words, the devil we know.

[closeupready]

28. And yes, nobody gives a crap about Pakistan.

But that only underscores why they feel that they are on their own in the world and can't depend upon anyone but themselves - because they can't.

[varun]

29. Seymour Hersch's interview on PBS

See why Bush made a major mistake in his "War on Terror":

http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_hersh.html

...JANE WALLACE: It might be safely said that the one country for whom the war on terror has been a bombless bonanza is Pakistan. In a matter of two weeks they went from being an international pariah, to being our new best friend.

The aid started flowing. It is flowing in the billions. Are they worthy of our friendship and our aid, the Pakistanis?

SY HERSH: In a perfect world, sure, it would be great if Musharraf, the head of the country can hold it together and they can become secular. And we can avoid having an Islamic republic with a lot of nuclear weapons. But it's dicey.

JANE WALLACE: What kind of dicey?

SY HERSH: I think it's a losing game. I think it's a losing game and I think there's a lot of evidence that Musharraf is certainly much more interested in his own survival than ours. I can't give you chapter and verse of things. He came to American when and when there was tremendous concern about the fate of Danny Pearl, the WALL STREET JOURNAL reporter.

And he was here about a week or so before it became known that Pearl was dead. And the whole time, we later learned, that he was here, when he was saying, you know telling us that he was doing everything he can. He was sure he was alive. He knew that Pearl was dead. We now know that. We knew he was deceiving us....

[closeupready]

31. Musharraf is a dictator, no question. But what naivete

to say that he - a dictator - is more interested in his own survival than ours. Of course he is. That's sort of a "duh" statement.

All leaders put their own countries' interests first. Israel comes right out and says it. We do it, but we try to be nice about our hypocrisy. Why does the fact that self-interest motivates Pakistan shock anybody? Isn't that international politics 101?

[varun]

33. Then why is Bush coddling a dictator?

Why is America giving $3 billion to Pakistan when it is well knows that it IS the source of terrorism in this world?

[closeupready]

34. Why do we do business with Communist China?

Because we basically have to. Why do we coddle the Saudis? Because we need their oil. Pakistan lies in a strategic area which has proven difficult to control, but Musharraf is probably doing better at that than whatever the alternatives are being suggested, such as strangling him financially.

[varun]

36. Did we do business with UAE?

It is clear that Musharraf is speaking with a forked tongue.

Time to end this charade.

[closeupready]

37. And do what exactly?

I'm curious to hear your thoughts. Thanks.

[varun]

38. Encourage Free and Fair Elections in Pakistan

and not prop up a dictator.

[closeupready]

39. And how do you get from Point A to Point B?

Sounds good to me, but how do you do it?

[varun]

40. Leave them alone

stop interfering in their affairs. Let the people of Pakistan decide whats best for them.

and stop supporting Musharraf.

[closeupready]

42. You can't really "stop interfering" with them if by that you mean isolate

them, stop giving assistance, etc. Surely you aren't suggesting that the US government signs over a $3 billion check to "Gen. Pervez Musharraf"? :D

We isolated Afghanistan, and look what happened.

So while I would rather have a truly democratic Pakistan, there are lots of reasons why there are no simple answers.

[K-W]

51. The US does not have to prop up dictators.

The US is an enemy to democracy around the world because its in the best interests of our CEO's and investors.

And what happened in Afghanistan has nothing whatsoever to do with isolation (although nobody is advocating isolation), Afghanistan was a non-stop war zone. You cant really blame that instability on isolation.


Regardless, there is a difference between not propping up a dictator and isolation.

[closeupready]

53. No, Afghanistan was not a non-stop war zone. The Taliban brought order to

what HAD BEEN non-stop war (there is not much debate that the Taliban's regime was bad).

Why was there non-stop war? Because after the Soviets pulled out, Afghanistan was armed for conflict against an enemy that no longer existed. The US pulled out, and Afghanistan was effectively isolated from the world. The various warlords used the arms to fight for power, and that's where isolation will get you. The US' history of isolationism in the run-up to WWII also offers lessons in why isolation is bad.

In other words, you can't just pull the money and suspend diplomatic relations with Pakistan and expect democracy and good things to follow. What may follow is anarchy, another dictatorship perhaps, all-out war, who knows.

[K-W]

57. Umm, yes it was a non-stop war zone.

That is what the Taliban brought order to. A devestated society that had been a non-stop warzone. A society ruled by local criminals of which the Taliban brought under some level of control. Had it not been a non-stop warzone, it would not have been a devestated society run by local criminals and there would not have been an armed and organized Taliban primed to control it.

You argued that the Taliban regime was caused by isolation, which is rediculous, it was caused by intervention, both Soviet and American. Imperial powers destroyed Afghani society, turned it into a warzone, and then left it for dead, that is what caused the problems, not isolation.

What US isolationism before WW2? When was the US isolationist?

Yes, you can just pull the money and suspend diplomatic support for Musharaaf and expect better things than we have now to follow. Anarchy? You just got done explaining exactly why the government would fall into the hands of a fairly authoritarian group no matter what and now you are arguing that it may fall into anarchy? Anarchy is most certainly not going to happen and neither is Pakistan attacking the US. And such paranoia is most certainly not a justification for continuing to support a dictatorship.

[closeupready]

61. I think it's great that people care about the average Pakistani.

That's what I care about, as well. :) I think we agree on what the outcome should look like, perhaps not on how to get there.

At any rate, I do not support Musharraf, just to make that clear.

[heirs_of_liberty]

48. That 'dictator' is all there is between us and Armageddon

Since they have no idea whatsoever of Republican Liberty and Liberalism in the Arab/Muslim world, there can be no such thing as 'democracy'!

What we call 'democracy' would be nothing more than the tyranny of the majority without our liberal Constitution of Liberty which stipulates individual and human rights beyond the powers or control of mere 'democracy' and strictly limits other forms of evil, populist established conservative-religious fascist tyranny from violating the independent rights of minorities and individuals.

When you hold an election in the Arab world it's merely a 'pick your tyranny' exercise, as you will notice from the Sunni Totalitarian Religious Fascist Party and the Shiite Totalitarian Religious Fascist Party in Iraq and the Hamas Totalitarian Religious Fascist Party in Palestine.

Moshareef is the only thing keeping a nuclear arsenal out of the hands of Osama Bin Ladin, who is at least 80X more popular in Pakistan than he is. We have Gehlen MI6-CIA Mafiosi Bush Sr to thank for financing that arsenal and creating Bin Ladin.

Voting for a tyranny like the "Christian Coalition" defeats the purpose of democracy itself, and is technically unconstitutional in our Republic of Liberty!

If you expect the National Republican Conservative Christianist Totalitarian Religious Fascist Party of America under the misadministration of Tory-Anglican BushCorp to 'nation build' then all you'll get is a Totalitarian Conservative Religious Fascist "Democratic' Republic because these Tory BushCorp Fundamentalist Conservatists simply cannot even spit out the evil epithet "Liberal" without emitting an nasty snarling scowl...

In order to best protect religion one must protect all religions, and one must also protect them from each other by keeping all of them, in every form, completely out of politics.

[K-W]

52. Yah, we cant let those crazy pakis have a vote.

Are you seriously arguing that we cant let Pakistani people have elections because they cant be trusted with it?

Do you seriously think Pakastini people are so stupid and insane that they would attack the United States?

Of course democracy would start out pretty undemocratic, just like our democracy is pretty undemocratic, but that doesnt mean they would elect a government bent on national suicide. You must have a very twisted concept of Pakastani people to think they all want to suicide bomb the US.

[varun]

70. Pakistan has had a democratic government...

for about 20 years, out of the fifty of so years since it has existed. They can have a democracy. US should push Musharraf to hold free elections. But it looks like Musharraf is ready for another 5 years...

[The Stranger]

30. Is this a news report from 1981?

[Kailassa]

47. Only one thing to do if America is proved to be aiding terrorists ...

When you see the Operation asSwarmer planes overhead, grab the duck-tape and plastic, wrap up your tuna and powdered milk with it and kiss it goodbye.

And take solace in the fact that for every town Buschco wipe out in their next pre-emptive strike, they're sure to kill at least one suspected terrorist.

And if the folks watching bombs rain down are terrorised rather than terrorist, well surely that's close enough to justify it all?

[splat@14]

49. C . Rice just took indonesian off the "no arms" list. Lord knows

they need some guns and missles there to help rebuild from the Tsunami. Clinton cut them off and pre Tsunami they were under human rights watch for military abuse of its citizens.....but now they are ok!

[wordpix2]

56. "resurgent Taliban were now at their most powerful since the official end"

Gee, I thought the war in Afghanistan was such a big success according to BushCo.

snip:
The director of the US Defence Intelligence Agency, Lieutenant General Michael Maples, recently claimed that a resurgent Taliban were now at their most powerful since the official end of the war five years ago.

[Rex]

59. Wouldn't doubt it.

We pimp weapons to the 4 corners of the world. I wonder how many of those IEDs in Iraq are being made with ordinance that SHOULD have been confiscated by the Army?

[Karenina]

62. Anyone else tiring

of boys with toys? Can't we just lock them in their rooms for awhile with NO GADGETS and a "BE A MENSCH" re-education program?

[Solly Mack]

63. chickens/roost

oh well...

[Octafish]

64. There are no ''rogue elements'' of ISI.

They all answer to the boss, Poppy.

[dansolo]

66. Where is the Bush doctrine now?

Pakistan is not our friend or ally.

[lovuian]

67. Pakistan is Georges toys and so is the Taliban

it makes me ill to see Bush dealing with them...

[closeupready]

69. There is an interesting parallel between Israel and Pakistan, strangely

It has been suggested by some that the Christian world failed to protect Jews during WWII even though it was known (or was probably known) that genocide was being committed against them. In the same way, the Christian world abandoned Pakistan during the days of Partition, even though thousands (some say millions) of muslims were being killed in the process.

So if any country, not just Israel or Pakistan, believes that they must be strong in order to defend themselves, how can you counter that real-world lesson from history?

[sattahipdeep]

72. Does that surprise u? business ya know n/t