Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts

July 15, 2008

Published: July 14, 2008

KABUL, Afghanistan — Taliban insurgents carried out a bold assault on a remote base near the border with Pakistan on Sunday, NATO reported, and a senior American military official said nine American soldiers were killed.


The New York Times

Taliban insurgents assaulted a base in Kunar Province.

The attack, the worst against Americans in Afghanistan in three years, illustrated the growing threat of Taliban militants and their associates, who in recent months have made Afghanistan a far deadlier war zone for American-led forces than Iraq.

The assault on the American base in Kunar Province was one of the fiercest by insurgents since the American-led invasion of Afghanistan routed the Taliban and Al Qaeda militants in late 2001.

The militants have since regained strength in the tribal areas of Pakistan, which they have often used as a base for raids into Afghanistan, an increasingly sore point for the American and Afghan governments.

The new American commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan emphasized that issue on Sunday in an interview that took place before details of the Kunar attack were disclosed, asserting that the militants were not only entering Afghan territory but also firing at targets from the Pakistan side.

“It all goes back to the problem set that there are sanctuaries in the tribal areas that militant insurgent groups are able to operate from with impunity,” said the commander, Gen. David D. McKiernan, who took over the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in June.

General McKiernan said insurgents based in Pakistan had carried out some kind of attack on Afghanistan “almost every day I have been here.”

It was the first time a senior commander had stated so clearly that militant groups were not only infiltrating from across the border to attack but were also firing from positions inside Pakistan.

NATO officials reported that nine soldiers were killed in the Kunar attack but did not specify the nationalities, in accordance with the policy of letting member countries report them first. A senior military official in Washington said that all nine were American.

The Kunar attack also left at least 15 other NATO soldiers — almost certainly Americans — and 4 Afghan soldiers wounded, and it was one of at least three significant attacks on Sunday, including a devastating suicide bombing in a southern city’s bazaar that killed at least 25 people, 20 of them civilians.

This year of the Afghanistan war is already proving to be the deadliest since the American-led invasion. Bush administration officials are now considering a redeployment of troops to Afghanistan from Iraq to help deal with the rising threat.

Deaths of American troops and their allies for the last two months have been higher than those inflicted in Iraq. In addition, nearly 700 Afghan civilians were killed in the first five months of the year, a marked increase over previous years, United Nations officials have said.

General McKiernan, a four-star general who commanded allied land forces during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, said there were three main reasons for the increase in violence: a change in tactics by the insurgents to small attacks on more vulnerable targets, such as the civilian population, district centers and convoys; the increasing progress of Afghan and NATO forces in pushing into regions previously controlled by the Taliban, which has led to more fighting; and the “deteriorating situation with tribal sanctuaries across the border” in Pakistan.

General McKiernan’s comments followed a weeklong visit to the region by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, who discussed a wide array of security issues with Pakistan’s leaders on Saturday in a surprise visit to Pakistan.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, after conferring with President Bush and Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, directed Admiral Mullen to add the stop in Pakistan. Given that this was Admiral Mullen’s fourth trip to Pakistan this year and his second in two months, the admiral’s talks with Pakistani officials underscored the Bush administration’s increasing concern over the rising violence in Afghanistan and its links with the Pakistan tribal areas.

“The secretary wanted to take advantage of the fact that Admiral Mullen would be in the region to reinforce our concern with the Pakistanis about the spike in violence in Afghanistan and to keep the pressure on in the tribal areas,” Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said in a telephone interview about Admiral Mullen’s Pakistan stopover.

Capt. John Kirby, a spokesman for Admiral Mullen, said it was apparent to the admiral that “the Pakistani leadership is aware of their challenges in the border region, as well as of U.S. military concerns there, and are working to address those challenges.”

Pakistan, for its part, has complained that American forces have repeatedly hit Pakistani territory, in particular on June 10, when United States air and artillery strikes killed 11 members of the Pakistani paramilitary force, the Frontier Corps, manning a border post.

General McKiernan did not comment on the June 10 attack since a three-party investigation into the border clash had not yet been concluded, but he was very clear that militants were using their sanctuary in Pakistan to fire across the border and that the NATO and American forces had the right to fire back. “We have the ability to protect ourselves,” he said.

“The point that I am trying to make is that the border security situation is not good, and that border runs for 2,500 kilometers,” or about 1,500 miles, he said.

While he expressed optimism that the American-led forces here would prevail and the insurgency would be defeated, “I look at this problem regionally, the viable outcome in Afghanistan to a large degree is dependent on some outcome in Pakistan with these tribal areas. That is a problem that is not getting better with time.”

The base that came under attack in Kunar Province on Sunday lies in one of the most inhospitable mountainous regions where American forces have frequently faced fierce battles with insurgents.

A NATO news release issued in Kabul said the insurgents attacked the Kunar base with rocket-propelled grenades and mortars, using houses, shops and a mosque in the nearby village of Wanat for cover. Both sides suffered casualties as the insurgents were repulsed, it said.

The only bigger single death toll for the Americans in the Afghanistan war came in June 2005 — also near Kunar — when an American Chinook helicopter was shot down by Taliban gunners in heavy combat. All 16 aboard and three others on the ground were killed.

The American command also reported a heavy clash on Sunday between Taliban insurgents and Afghan and American forces patrolling in the southern province of Helmand in which it estimated that 40 militants were killed by airstrikes as boats and bridges across the Helmand River were destroyed.

A suicide bomber on a motorbike blew himself up in a busy bazaar in the town of Deh Rawood in the southern province of Oruzgan, killing the local police chief and four subordinates. Twenty civilians were also killed and 30 more were wounded, the provincial police chief, Juma Gul Himat, said by telephone. Bodies and wounded people were strewn across the street as the police rushed to help.

Taimoor Shah contributed reporting from Kandahar, Afghanistan, Jane Perlez from Islamabad, Pakistan, and Eric Schmitt from Washington.


July 07, 2008

Eyewitness: Afghan bombing

Correspondents and eyewitnesses have spoken of the aftermath of a deadly explosion at India's embassy in Kabul, which has killed dozens of people and left many more seriously injured.

Witnesses told of body parts hanging from trees and of feverish efforts to help badly injured victims at a key hospital in the Afghan capital.

The BBC's Martin Patience, reporting from the scene of the attack, said Afghan and international forces had "swarmed" around the blast site in the immediate aftermath of the explosion.

Blue and white tickertape and armed security personnel were keeping curious onlookers about 200 metres away from the Indian embassy, our correspondent reported.

Workers wearing orange boiler suits swept rubble off the road, while others picked through the wreckage of a collapsed wall, he added. Cranes also lifted the remains of cars onto trucks to be taken away.

'Burnt bodies'

At Kabul's hospitals, reports of a major explosion prompted a feverish effort to cope with the influx of dead and injured, with support and administrative staff helping doctors and nurses deal with the casualties.

At Wazir Akbar Khan hospital, IT manager Shaker Hamdad left his desk to help carry in the wounded, while nurses carried away those for whom help came too late.

"Today I saw four bodies come in, completely burnt," Mr Hamdad told the BBC.

"They were completely black, like tar, and the nurses took them straight to the morgue. Four others I saw had very serious injuries and were being treated.

"Today was a really difficult day, one of the most shocking days we have had here.

"I can't help medically but when these things happen we all try to help in some way - we get people into the emergency room, we rush to find doctors, anything really. Everybody gets involved, we have to.

"I took a job as an interpreter, then became IT manager. But if you see people lying on the ground in pain it's hard not to help."

'Quite normal'

One Afghan woman who works with an international organisation in Kabul said she could not understand why the bombers had targeted crowds outside the Indian embassy.

Many Afghans queue there for visas to take sick relatives and friends for medical treatment in India, Heela Barakzai told the BBC.

"It's really sad. I can't really find the words to explain it, because the number [of dead] is rising time by time and it's all those innocent people who were there to get visas, to get out of the country - to take their patients for treatment, or for business work," she said.

"I don't know why they were targeted, and for what. They are not linked to international troops, so I really don't know why they targeted them."

Saska Galic, a Croatian who has lived and worked in Kabul for five years, saw the explosion from his house just a few hundred metres away.

"This is quite normal in Kabul now," he told the BBC.

"You never know who is walking in front of you in the street, or who is behind you. It's very dangerous."

ABC News

40 Dead in Indian Embassy Blast in Afghan Capital

40 killed in suicide car bombing outside Indian Embassy in Afghan capital

By AMIR SHAH

The Associated Press

KABUL, Afghanistan

A car bomb ripped through the front wall of the Indian Embassy in central Kabul on Monday, killing 40 people in the deadliest attack in Afghanistan's capital since the fall of the Taliban, officials said.

The massive explosion detonated by a suicide bomber damaged two embassy vehicles entering the compound, near where dozens of Afghan men line up every morning to apply for visas.

President Hamid Karzai condemned the bombing and said it was carried out by militants trying to rupture the friendship between Afghanistan and India.

The Afghan Interior Ministry hinted that the attack was carried out with help from Pakistan's intelligence service, saying that "terrorists have carried out this attack in coordination and consultation with some of the active intelligence circles in the region." The Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi, said Pakistan condemned the attack and terrorism in all forms.

The embassy is located on a busy, tree-lined street near Afghanistan's Interior Ministry in the city center that is protected on both ends by police checkpoints. Several nearby shops were damaged or destroyed in the blast, and smoldering ruins covered the street. The explosion rattled much of the Afghan capital.

Shortly after the attack, a woman ran out of a Kabul hospital screaming, crying and hitting her face with both of her hands. Her two children, a girl named Lima and a boy named Mirwais, had been killed.

"Oh my God!" the woman screamed. "They are both dead."

Najib Nikzad, an Interior Ministry spokesman, said the blast killed 40 people. Earlier, Abdullah Fahim, the spokesman for the Ministry of Public Health, said the explosion killed at least 28 people and wounded 141, but an update of the number of injured was not immediately available. The Interior Ministry said six police officers and three embassy guards were among those killed.

In Delhi, India's foreign minister said four Indians, including the military attache and a diplomat, were killed in the attack. Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee said India will send a high-level delegation to Kabul in coming days.

The blast also killed five Afghan security guards at the nearby Indonesian Embassy, where windows were shattered and doors and gates broken. Two diplomats were slightly wounded, Indonesia's foreign ministry said.

In Washington, Gordon Johndroe, a White House national security spokesman, offered condolences to the victims.

"Extremists continue to show their disregard for all human life and their willingness to kill fellow Muslims as well as others," he said. "The United States stands with the people of Afghanistan and India as we face this common enemy."

Afghanistan has seen a sharp rise in violence from Taliban militants in recent months. Insurgents are packing bombs with more explosives than ever, one reason why more U.S. and NATO troops were killed in June than any month since the 2001 invasion.

Still, a Taliban spokesman, Zabiullah Mujahid, denied that the militants were behind the bombing. The Taliban tend to claim responsibility for attacks that inflict heavy tolls on international or Afghan troops, and deny responsibility for attacks that primarily kill Afghan civilians.

"Whenever we do a suicide attack, we confirm it," Mujahid said. "The Taliban did not do this one."

The 8:30 a.m. explosion was the deadliest attack in Kabul since the fall of the Taliban in 2001 and the deadliest in Afghanistan since a suicide bomber killed more than 100 people at a dog fighting competition in Kandahar province in February.

No one has claimed responsibility for the attack.

In Delhi, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said the attack would not deter the mission from "fulfilling our commitments to the government and people of Afghanistan."

Afghanistan Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta visited the embassy shortly after the attack, ministry spokesman Sultan Ahmed Baheen said.

"India and Afghanistan have a deep relationship between each other. Such attacks of the enemy will not harm our relations," Spanta told the embassy staff, according to Baheen.

The Indian ambassador and his deputy were not inside the embassy at the time of the blast, Baheen said.

Militants have frequently attacked Indian offices and projects around Afghanistan since launching an insurgency after the ouster of the Taliban at the end of the 2001. Many Taliban militants have roots in Pakistan, which has long had a troubled relationship with India.

When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan in the late 1990s, the Islamic militia was supported by Pakistan, India's arch-rival. Pakistan today remains wary of strengthening ties between Afghanistan and India.

The United Nations' envoy to Afghanistan said that "in no culture, no country, and no religion is there any excuse or justification for such acts."

"The total disregard for innocent lives is staggering and those behind this must be held responsible," the envoy, Kai Eide, said.

The U.N. sent an e-mail to its staff advising them to stay off Kabul's roads because of reports that a second suicide car bomber was in the city.

The embassy attack was the sixth suicide bombing in Kabul this year. Insurgent violence has killed more than 2,200 people — mostly militants — in Afghanistan this year, according to an Associated Press count of official figures.

The embassy in the last several days had beefed up security by installing large, dirt-filled blast walls often used by military forces.

While Afghanistan has seen increasing violence in recent months, Kabul has been largely spared the random bomb attacks that Taliban militants use in their fight against Afghan and international troops.

In September 2006, a suicide bomber near the gates of the Interior Ministry killed 12 people and wounded 42 others. After that blast, additional guards and barriers were posted on the street.

In two separate bombings Monday against police convoys in the country's south, seven officers were killed and 10 others were wounded, officials said.

In Uruzgan province, a roadside bomb killed four police on patrol and wounded seven others, said provincial police chief Juma Gul Himat.

In the Zhari district of Kandahar, another roadside blast killed three officers and wounded three others, said district chief Niyaz Mohammad Sarhadi.

NATO's International Security Assistance Force, meanwhile, said one of its soldiers died in an attack in the south on Sunday.

———

Associated Press Writer Rahim Faiez contributed to this report.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/print?id=5319606

The bomber rammed an explosives-laden vehicle into the gates of the Indian embassy, where people were queuing for visas at the time.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7492691.stm

NUKEWARS

India govt still undecided on US nuclear pact: officials


by Staff Writers

New Delhi (AFP) June 26, 2008

India's ruling Congress party has not decided if it will pursue an atomic energy deal with the United States and alienate leftist allies that prop up the government, an official said Thursday.

The governing party failed Wednesday to persuade its partners to support the pact, leaving it with the choice of going it alone and risking early elections or ditching the landmark deal altogether.

The pact, concluded in 2006, aims to bring India into the loop of global atomic commerce. But the deal is bitterly opposed by communists, who say it will draw New Delhi too close to Washington.

"No decision has been taken as yet," a senior official from the prime minister's office told AFP on condition he not be named. "Whenever the decision is taken, it will be communicated."

The communists have vowed to force early elections if the government forges ahead with implementing the deal, which would mean going to the polls by the end of this year.

It is unclear if Congress is ready to face the electorate at a time of rising inflation -- notably of fuel and food prices -- or if it would rather finish its full term and wait for scheduled polls in May 2009.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has appeared willing to risk his government to push through the deal, which he says is crucial for India's energy security.

Syndicated columnist Neerja Chowdhury told AFP that "who represents India at the G-8 meeting in Japan next month will indicate whether the government will go forward with the pact."

Singh has indicated he will not attend the meeting of the eight major industrial powers if the government decides to shelve the pact, since he is due to meet US President George W. Bush on the sidelines of the conference.

The two leaders struck the deal amid much fanfare in New Delhi in 2006.

According to a source in India's foreign ministry, "arrangements are being made for both eventualities, we will know for sure in the next few days."


http://www.spacewar.com/reports/India_govt_still_undecided_on_US_nuclear_pact_officials_999.html


April 27, 2008

Big Afghanistan update

Afghan leader criticises US over war

AFGHAN President Hamid Karzai criticized the US and British conduct of
the war in Afghanistan, telling The New York Times in an interview
published today his Government must be accorded the lead in policy
decisions.

Mr Karzai told the newspaper he wanted US forces to stop arresting
suspected Taliban members and their sympathizers, saying that fear of
arrest along with past mistreatment were discouraging them from coming
forward and laying down their arms. "It has to happen," he said of the
end to such arrests.

In calling for greater Afghan autonomy, Mr Karzai said, "For the success
of the world in Afghanistan, it would be better to recognize this
inherent character in Afghanistan and work with it and support it."

"Eventually, if the world is to succeed in Afghanistan, it will be by
building the Afghan state, not by keeping it weak," he told the Times at
his presidential office.

Mr Karzai said relations with Pakistan's new government began on a good
note. "I am fairly confident of their good intentions," he said. "If the
current government has the full backing of the military and intelligence
circles in Pakistan and with the good intentions that they have, things
will improve."

Afghan Leader Criticizes U.S., Calling Arrests and Casualties Too High

By CARLOTTA GALL

New York Times April 26, 2008

KABUL, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai strongly criticized the
British and American conduct of the war here on Friday, insisting in an
interview that his government be given the lead in policy decisions.

Mr. Karzai said that he wanted American forces to stop arresting
suspected Taliban and their sympathizers, and that the continued threat
of arrest and past mistreatment were discouraging Taliban from coming
forward to lay down their arms.

He criticized the American-led coalition as prosecuting the war on
terrorism in Afghan villages, saying the real terrorist threat lay in
sanctuaries of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Pakistan.

The president said that civilian casualties, which have dropped
substantially since last year, needed to cease completely. For nearly
two years the American-led coalition has refused to recognize the need
to create a trained police force, he said, leading to a critical lack of
law and order.

The comments came as Mr. Karzai is starting to point toward re-election
next year, after six years in office, and may be part of a political
calculus to appear more assertive in his dealings with foreign powers as
opponents line up to challenge him.

But they also follow a serious dip in his relations with some of the
countries contributing to the NATO-led security force and the
reconstruction of Afghanistan, and indicate that as the insurgency has
escalated, so, too, has the chafing among allies.

Complaints have been rising for months among diplomats and visiting
foreign officials about what is seen as Mr. Karzais weak leadership, in
particular his inability to curb narcotics trafficking and to remove
ineffective or corrupt officials. Some diplomats have even expressed
dismay that, for lack of an alternative, the country and its donors may
face another five years of poor management by Mr. Karzai.

He was quick to reject such criticism, pointing out the immense
difficulties that he and his government faced What is it we have not
gone through? while trying to rebuild a state that was utterly destroyed.

He called instead for greater respect of Afghanistans fierce
independence, and for more attention to be paid to building up the
country, than doing things for it.

For the success of the world in Afghanistan, it would be better to
recognize this inherent character in Afghanistan and work with it and
support it, he said, speaking at his presidential office. Eventually,
if the world is to succeed in Afghanistan, it will be by building the
Afghan state, not by keeping it weak.

Mr. Karzai said he was fighting corruption, a problem that is among the
chief complaints heard frequently by diplomats and Afghans alike. Mr.
Karzai said he had just fired an official the previous day and would be
firing more soon.

Yet the president explained that Afghanistan had never had so much money
and resources pouring in, or seen such disparities in salaries, and was
simply not capable yet of preventing the corruption.

He admitted that lots of things in the last six years could have been
handled better and singled out policies led by the United States, namely
tackling terrorism and handling the Taliban, both as prisoners and on
the battlefield.

On terrorism, he repeated a call he has made for several years, that
sanctuaries across the border in Pakistan be closed off.

There is no way but to close the sanctuaries, he said. Pakistan will
have no peace, Pakistans progress will suffer, so will Afghanistans
peace and progress, so will the worlds. If you want to live, and live
in peace, and work for prosperity, that has to happen. The sanctuaries
must go, period.

The deaths of civilians in the fighting have also been a big problem, he
said. It seriously undermines our efforts to have an effective campaign
against terrorism, he said. While NATO says civilian casualties have
declined in the last six months, Mr. Karzai said that was not good enough.

I am not happy with civilian casualties coming down; I want an end to
civilian casualties, he said. As much as one may argue its difficult,
I dont accept that argument.

He added, Because the war against terrorism is not in Afghan villages,
the war against terrorism is elsewhere, and thats where the war should
go, referring to the Taliban and Qaeda sanctuaries in Pakistan.

He said the issue had caused tension between him and American officials.
While those moments were very, very difficult, I must also be fair to
say that our partners in America have recognized my concerns and have
acted on them in good faith.

One of the biggest mistakes of the last six years has been the handling
of the Taliban, he said, and the failure of his government to guarantee
former members the amnesty that Mr. Karzai promised when the movement
was toppled in December 2001.

He blamed mistreatment by some warlords and American forces for driving
the Taliban out of the country, to Pakistan, where they regrouped and
took up weapons again.

Some of the warlords, and the coalition forces at times, in certain
areas of the country, behaved in a manner that frightened the Taliban to
move away from Afghanistan, he said. That should not have happened.

The weakness of his own government meant that he learned only much later
of some of the things that were occurring, he said.

He gave an example of a former member of the Taliban who was quietly
running a paint shop in Kabul and had been arrested three times by
American and Afghan security services.

We have to make sure that when a Talib comes to Afghanistan, that he is
safe from arrest by the coalition, he said. And we dont come to know
when the coalition arrests them; it is a major problem for us, a problem
that we have spoken about repeatedly without solution.

Asked if he could stop American forces from arresting suspected Taliban
or their sympathizers in Afghanistan, he said, We are working hard on
it, very hard on it.

He added, It has to happen.

Mr. Karzai said he had not complained to the Americans about their
treatment of people in their custody, despite long detentions, because
he did not have details of specific cases.

Despite the many problems, Mr. Karzai expressed optimism over
Afghanistans path, and said that the change of government in Pakistan
could bring progress against terrorism. We began on a very good note,
he said of relations with the new government, led by the party of former
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who was killed in December.

I am fairly confident of their good intentions, he said. If the
current government has the full backing of the military and intelligence
circles in Pakistan and with the good intentions that they have, things
will improve.

The president said he supported the Pakistani governments efforts to
make peace with Taliban there who were not a threat to the rest of the
world.

But if the deal is with those that are hard-core terrorists, Al Qaeda,
and are bent upon sooner or later again causing damage to Pakistan, and
to Afghanistan and to the rest of the world, then thats wrong and we
should definitely not do it.

He said he did not know Baitullah Mehsud, the militant leader who has
been accused of instigating Ms. Bhuttos assassination, but said he
would send him some advice: All that he is doing is hurting his own
people, that he shouldnt do that.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company


March 21, 2008

YouTube Unplugged (and human rights)



As Foreign Governments Block Sensitive
Content, Video Site Must Pick Between
Bending to Censorship, Doing Business
By JANE SPENCER and KEVIN J. DELANEY
March 21, 2008; Page B1

On Sunday, access to Google Inc.'s YouTube inside China was cut off after the Web site was flooded with graphic images from Tibet, including videos of burning trucks and monks being dragged through the streets by Chinese soldiers.

Blocking Western Web sites is routine in China, where the government has tightly controlled the flow of information. But the new YouTube blackout is the latest in a string of clashes between the site and foreign governments in Asia and the Middle East that's forcing the company to grapple with the consequences of its increasingly global reach.

TIBET ON YOUTUBE
Click the images to watch the videos at YouTube.
[V1] Chinese police scatter a crowd of Tibetan protesters in East Tibet. "Tibetan culture is being suppressed," an unidentified Tibetan monk says.
[v2] On March 10, the Tibetan Freedom Movement launches protests around the world. In New York City, supporters gather at City Hall and march to U.N. headquarters.
[v3] A composition of photographs from the Tibetan protests around the world, with the song "Come Home" by the American band, OneRepublic.
[v4] Video taken with a mobile phone of Tibetan protesters gathering in front of a Chinese office in Labrang, Amdo, Tibet, March 15.

Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt raised the issue in a meeting in Beijing with Cai Mingzhao, vice minister of the State Council Information Office, on Monday, the company said. The Council denied any knowledge of the blockage and promised to investigate, according to Google. On Thursday, YouTube remained inaccessible from China except to users who took extra technical steps to circumvent the ban.

Last Friday, a Turkish court banned YouTube over a clip deemed disrespectful to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, Turkey's founder. In February, Pakistan briefly banned YouTube because of an anti-Islam video clip posted on the site that the government said was so inflammatory it could spark riots. In the fall, Thailand blocked YouTube after the site refused to remove a video considered insulting to the nation's king. (The clip showed a pair of women's feet -- considered the most offensive part of the body -- above the king's head.) And citizens in a number of other countries, including Syria, United Arab Emirates and Morocco, have reported YouTube outages after sensitive content was posted.

The clashes have implications for YouTube's growth abroad, potentially forcing the company to choose between bending to censorship and losing business opportunities.

"This is a situation that the company and all Internet companies will be facing in many countries with all types of political systems as the Internet matures and millions more people log on," says Robert Boorstin, Google's director of policy communications in Washington. "At all times, our goal is to maximize the amount of information available to citizens around the world."

Nowhere is the issue more pressing than in China -- home to the world's largest population of Web users -- where agreeing to government censorship has been a basic condition of doing business for years. YouTube is still a relatively small player in China, lagging behind homegrown competitors like Tudou.com and Yoku.com. But it has a loyal following among young urban Chinese, who use it to find cutting-edge animation clips from Korea and Japan. Many Chinese also know YouTube as a place to find sensitive clips that have been removed from other Chinese sites.

The site has been blocked in China several times before, including for an extended period in October. That was around the time that YouTube launched a site in Taiwan, the U.S. Congress awarded the Dalai Lama its gold medal and the Chinese Communist Party congress was under way. YouTube has localized versions of its site in Taiwan and Hong Kong, but not one hosted in China itself, a move that would require an Internet-content license from the Chinese government. Google has said it doesn't plan to host user-generated content, such as video, blogs or email, on computer servers in China. Such materials would be vulnerable to seizure by the government if located on servers there.

Google previously grappled with censorship issues in China when it released a Chinese search service in January 2006. At the time, it decided to censor its search results to comply with Beijing's strict limits on access to information, concluding that was better than not offering any regularly accessible service at all. On Thursday, a Google search for "Tibet" and "riots" turned up few results. The same search on Google's U.S.-based English search site produced some 461,000 results.

So far, YouTube is taking a similar approach, despite ongoing debate at Google over the strategy. In Thailand, in order to be accessible, it agreed to block Thai users from seeing clips deemed insulting to the king in violation of Thai law. In Turkey, YouTube has suspended the account of the person who uploaded the Ataturk video, though the site remains banned there. In Myanmar, YouTube was banned after clips of protesting monks appeared on the site. In that case, YouTube declined to remove the clips and remains banned.

Media analysts say YouTube's string of censorship flare-ups -- and the site's sometimes inconsistent responses -- indicate it needs to develop a more transparent strategy for dealing with these issues. YouTube's community guidelines state the site encourages "free speech and defend[s] everyone's right to express unpopular points of view." But the site also reserves the right to remove content it deems inappropriate, which gives it significant discretion when it comes to politically sensitive content.

"We have a delicate balancing act between being a platform for free expression and also obeying local laws around the world," says YouTube spokesman Ricardo Reyes.

YouTube reviews videos when they are flagged by users to determine whether they violate its terms of use, which prohibit such content as graphic violence. YouTube users can appeal the removal of videos, which can trigger a secondary review.

After being alerted by users last month, YouTube removed a video clip that appeared to document abuse of prisoners at a Russian prison camp that YouTube determined violated the site's graphic-violence policy. It eventually restored the video but required viewers to click to consent to watch a clip that "may contain content that is inappropriate for some users." YouTube says its staff hadn't initially been aware that the video was meant to document alleged human-rights abuses.

The stakes are high because material distributed on YouTube is affecting some of the world's most incendiary political situations. "It's actually changed the whole political scenario in Pakistan," says Shahzad Ahmad, an activist with the civil-rights group Bytes for All in Pakistan, who believes the site played a role in the defeat to Pervez Musharraf's party in recent elections.

Google has reached out to the U.S. State Department for assistance with the censorship issue in China, says a person familiar with the matter. The company, along with Yahoo Inc., Microsoft Corp. and others, has been working for more than 18 months with human-rights groups, academics and socially responsible investors to develop a code of conduct for operating in countries that limit free expression and individual privacy. A bill to be considered by Congress would require U.S. companies to provide the U.S. government with details of any compliance with censorship in Internet-restricting countries.

-- Juliet Ye contributed to this article.


February 16, 2008

Pakistan update!! from Pakistan Daily Times

EDITORIAL: What might happen tomorrow

Shadows keep falling on the elections even in the last hours before the polling begins. The attorney general is allegedly caught on tape telling someone that the government is going to rig the elections. Ten terrorists linked to the Taliban are caught in Karachi ready to blow up several polling stations with massive amounts of explosive material. A thousand people, all Afghans, are arrested in Peshawar and accused of “trouble-making”. Eighty thousand troops are deployed to protect the polling stations, one-third of which have been declared dangerous.

This is going to be a very different election from past ones. It is happening mostly on TV. It is mired in rumours of dhaandli or rigging whose evidence keeps popping up here and there. The political parties, scared of being short-changed, are threatening rejection of polls and violent agitation, but with a clear subtext that it might hurt their interests. Every party is claiming exaggerated gains at the polls since any modest assessment might make the voters turn away. The incumbent PMLQ began by harclaiming 150 seats in the National Assembly together with its allies, to come down to 110 on the eve of polls, till some unnamed PMLQ leaders are being quoted in the press as ready to accept the PPP and the PMLN government after the polls. The real threat to the 2008 elections remains a low voters’ turnout.

The PPP has a sympathy wave welling up for it. There is no doubt in anybody’s mind that it will sweep in rural Sindh, thus sharing the province with urban MQM. It is estimated to win 35-40 out of 61 National Assembly seats in Sindh. One analyst says it will also win 40-50 out of the 148 seats in Punjab, 10-15 of NWFP’s 35, 3 of Balochistan’s 19, to make up a total of 100-108. This is possible because the PPP is the only national party with votes in all the four provinces. With this kind of total it will certainly be the front-runner for putting together the government at the centre. Significantly, the party’s mood is suitably conciliatory and it threatens no one, not even President Pervez Musharraf.

The PMLN is the comeback party in Punjab. If the PMLQ suffers it will do so because of the ability of the PMLN to bounce back, although to write off the incumbent PMLQ would be unwise since it is fielding some very strong candidates despite defections and its own policy to undercut some of its candidates — after giving them tickets — through independents. The 53 seats in South Punjab are under threat from the PMLN which is also set to win handsomely in Lahore and Faisalabad, the second and third largest cities in the country. One feels that Mr Nawaz Sharif is reconciled to letting the PPP rule in Islamabad and handle President Musharraf while he gets Punjab on the basis of all the tools he will have handy in the National Assembly to play the kingmaker.

The rise of the ANP in the NWFP is bound to fill the vacuum left behind by a bickering MMA. Out of all the parties, it is the ANP which is campaigning bravely after being fatally targeted twice by the terrorists. If the voters come out the party is sure to increase its presence in the provincial assembly as well as have enough numbers in the National Assembly to form meaningful alliances. The PPP doesn’t have a good past record with the ANP, but the new orientation in both parties is to disembarrass themselves of their old identity markers and seek reconciliation. Just as the PPP began making overtures to the MQM in Sindh right after the arrival of Ms Bhutto from exile, the big party is bound to ride together with the ANP and allow it to form the government in the NWFP.

The PPP was in the process of discussing power-sharing with the PMLN on Friday. Mr Nawaz Sharif has stiffened his rhetoric on the presumed basis of negotiations, but this could be mere electoral pyrotechnics to win votes. He wants President Musharraf ousted and he wants the dismissed judges restored. (His wife has promised a gathering that her party would replace President Musharraf with Dr AQ Khan.) No doubt the parties will have to develop the requisite measure of flexibility after the elections to work in double harness at the centre and in Punjab. There is evidence that they don’t want to revert to the cloak-and-dagger days of the 1988 assemblies when Punjab spies called Midnight Jackals had tried to topple the PPP at the centre.

At no time in the past have local and foreign observers been forced to keep their fingers crossed as now. There are far too many elements for comfort today who would wish to see the elections go wrong. Nor is the world too reassured of Pakistan’s real intentions after it returns to democracy. *

SECOND EDITORIAL:Naval exercises with India

A symposium held by the naval chiefs of Indian Ocean states heard the India naval chief saying his country would welcome naval exercises with the Pakistan navy. There were 27 naval chiefs present at the symposium but the Pakistani chief was not there. Many environmental issues were discussed. A UAE security representative present at the meeting asked for protection of the under-sea communications cables laid on the ocean floor at the cost of billions of dollars.

India has done naval and military exercises with the US and China recently. Pakistan and India too should agree to cooperate at sea where their fishermen tend to violate presumed territorial waters. Agreed that the Sir Creek dispute has complicated the matter of the maritime boundary, but Indo-Pak disputes have tended to be perennial and must be ignored now till they disappear gradually through bilateral normalisation. Not attending the symposium means isolating yourself especially in relation to the Gulf where Pakistan’s security interests are involved. Pakistan’s India policy has become snagged with Islamabad’s obsession with a quid pro quo, whereas national interest should be supreme, especially when it demands pacification of the eastern border to face up to the trouble coming across the Durand Line.

February 13, 2008

Pakistan editorial about destabilization

Unbroken cycle of violence and state myopia
By Shireen M Mazari
2/13/2008
The extent of the lawlessness prevalent in the country today had never been so stridently evident before May 12 last year with the carnage in Karachi. Since then, violence on all sides has become the hallmark of our state and society. First there has been the US-led war on terror, in which Pakistan has become a frontline state. Unfortunately, that has meant accepting a US-formulated military-centric strategy which has brought disaster for the US in Iraq and Afghanistan; and has merely increased the violence and mayhem in Pakistan. Today, there is a near-anarchic situation that has moved beyond the tribal belt into the settled areas of the NWFP and is creeping into the rest of the country as well. The disappearance of our ambassador to Afghanistan on Monday, 11 February, as well as the kidnapping of two PAEC personnel, reflects the declining security in the NWFP.

Is it a mere coincidence that these incidents occurred after the wounding and capture of Dadullah, who was attempting to cross into Pakistan from Afghanistan after his dismissal from the Taliban movement of Afghanistan by Mullah Omar. With the denunciation of Baitullah Mehsud and Dadullah by the Afghan Taliban spokesperson, Zabihullah Mujahid (27 December, 2007) – who had said that there is a purely Afghan movement aimed at fighting a jihad against foreign occupation and that Pakistani extremists are irritants for them -- these extremists and their followers are on a weaker wicket within Pakistan.

The kidnapping incidents come in the wake of some seeming success the military has had in recent weeks against the militants in Pakistan. Whatever the US failures in its own war on terror, it has managed to successfully shift the centre of gravity of this war from Afghanistan to Pakistan. Given the various levels at which Pakistan is being targeted in the US, the aim is clearly to destabilise Pakistan, which is why one does need to ask the question: Is there some US linkage to certain acts of destabilisation, especially in terms of the kidnapping of PAEC personnel -- despite the fact that they are not linked to SPD -- given the numerous US personnel roaming around Pakistan in native dress and beards? After all, with the assertive and public manner in which we have countered the absurd allegations regarding safety and command and control of our nuclear assets, the US could become more desperate in its efforts to continue to raise the bogey of loose nukes -- even though they should now be the central concern in this context, given their B-52 incident of August 2007.

Of course, more pertinent is the question why we are falling prey to this nefarious US design of destabilisation of Pakistan? First, it is the sheer level of violence emanating from all sides. Targeting of political rallies through bombs and suicide attacks, kidnappings, political murders, and collateral damage of civilians in drone attacks in the tribal belt -- all these bode ill for the health of the Pakistani state and its civil society.

Worse still, instead of moving into the tribal belt and other parts of NWFP where there is unrest and violence, with a holistic policy of economic incentives, health and education initiatives and political mainstreaming, alongside law and order enforcement and a visible judicial redress set up, the state is seeming to offer controversial sops like the imposition of Qazi courts through a new Shariah Regulation 2008 -- which presently rests with the president -- which will create further cleavages between the troubled areas and the rest of the country. This regulation is for the Malakand division, which will be governed by a different legal system than the rest of the country. So, the message being sent out to civil society at large is if you can use enough violence to challenge the state's authority, you can have the legal system of your choice. Let us recall the strong links between the extremists of Malakand with the clerics of Lal Masjid especially in terms of snowballing effects.

For the people of Malakand division, the establishment of the Qazi courts will deprive them of any judicial redress at the highest level, since the Shariah Court at the division level will be the apex court for the people of the seven districts of Malakand division. So these poor people will not have the freedom to appeal against the decision of the Shariah Court in the Peshawar High Court or in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. How can we deny some of our citizens these fundamental rights which other citizens of Pakistan have?

Is this the way to build a cohesive and modern polity? Such short term controversial moves on the part of the state can, in the long run, negate social and political cohesion of the nation. After all, what did the earlier measures, similar in nature, do for Malakand except create more space for local extremists and criminals? One should recall that during 1994, the provincial government in Peshawar was terrorised into negotiating with radical mullah Sufi Mohammed and into conceding a Qazi system in Malakand which eventually led to the NWFP's Shar'i Nizam-e-Adl Regulation of 1999, for this division. Learning from history may be painful but not learning from even recent history is our national tragedy.

If the state is now committed to bringing the tribal areas into the mainstream than how can it deny some of its own people in the settled areas their fundamental right of access to the highest court of the land, simply because they happen to live in an area being terrorised by a minority of terrorising extremists?

We seem to have no clear long term policy direction in terms of the tribal belt and the trouble spots of the NWFP, which is why there is a growing sense of lawlessness, rendering the ordinary citizen insecure and overcome with fear, while the extremists and terrorists continue to be emboldened. Instead of overcoming the deficient state performance in the troubled areas by asserting the will of the state and providing basic amenities so that the ordinary citizen has a stake in the system, short term sops are being offered to the trouble makers at the expense of the innocent.

Also of interest is what one hears when one talks to people from areas such as Mohmand and Bajaur. There is a repetitive theme that outsiders are offering lucrative lures to the locals to get them to use violence and destabilise the state. Perhaps that is why one is seeing young teens offering themselves as suicide bombers in return for money for their poverty-stricken families. That is why, unlike in Palestine, we are not seeing the farewell videos or notes of bombers in which their religious and political commitment is frighteningly evident. But that is also why the state of Pakistan can, with a commitment to bringing in development at the economic, social and political levels, counter the suicide recruitment trend effectively.

The poverty and neglect of the people has created a human dignity deficit and its restoration requires the state to show itself as a responsive and positive entity. Putting in place discriminatory procedures of justice, and denying the people of some areas the rights available to other citizens is hardly the answer. In fact that will only ensure a continuing cycle of violence, radicalisation and hatred in the tribal belt and the surrounding settled areas.



The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com

February 06, 2008

Nukes: A Question, a complication and a solution

The obvious is the obvious about nukes. Nuclear energy is POISON. Remember that scene in the movie where Mao tells the Dalai Lama that religion is POOOOOOOOY sun, well try to get that enunciation in your mind. POOOOOOOOOOOOOOY sun.

A very brief run down of the idiocy in the past year should make that obvious to someone the least bit literate. The earthquake in Japan and the leak (covered up, but plenty in the blog about it), the du soldiers coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan, there's been nuclear submarine incidents because people faked inspection, and of course the infamous B-2 incident in Barksdale.. A nuke is still missing and the airfield in N. Dakota still not brought up to snuff. And now - those of us in the know we know a true rogue state, Khazakstan has uranium all the gear via Bill Clinton and Frank Guistra. As we like to say, niiiiiiiiiiiice.

And then again - there is Sibelgate.

My feeling is that NO ONE should have gotten into the uranium and plutonium buZiness at all in the first instance as the result of the bombing of Japan should have left a very graphic idea of why to LEAVE IT ALONE.. Uranium is a toxic byproduct of copper mining. A POOOOOOOOOOY sun.

So people think .. well, we are running out oil (we are having problems producing enough for the demand, that's peak oil!! and we need nuclear energy, so let's keep up the Nuclear Game with the Big Payoffs. But as I say - does everyone want to become a glow worm??

So let's say we get sane, the question is what do we DO?

We take it all apart just they way we put up the facilities to industrialize this POOOOOOOOOOOOOY sun. The same exact way, brick by brick, bolt by bolt. But some people are gonna resist and that isn't Iran .. Here's a good for instance and what I mean by a complication - it came into my box today.

Btw, before I get out of the way, can you spell

C O V E R U P ??

Thought so.

And btw, Veeeeeeeeeeeeeep Cheney is the top of the command when the circular firing squad finally gets going.

Ah, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. Great, great lessons our allies have learned from the United States government. Ain't us peaceniks who cause the problems.

[pssst. they aren't drunk so much as on speeeeeeeeeeed.]


A Pakistani view of U.S. nuclear weapons

"The [U.S.] Air Force has made substantial changes in its handling of nuclear weapons in the wake of a B-52 flight last August during which the pilots and crew were unaware they were carrying six air-launched cruise missiles with nuclear warheads."

-- "Air Force Alters Rules for Handling of Nuclear Arms,"
Washington Post January 25, 2008.

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN, JANUARY 25--At a press conference in Islamabad today, Pakistani Brig. Gen. Atta M. Iqhman expressed concern about U.S. procedures for handling nuclear weapons. Iqhman, who oversees the safety and security of the Pakistani nuclear force, said that U.S. protocols for storing and handling nuclear weapons are inadequate.

"In Pakistan, we store nuclear warheads separately from their delivery systems, and a nuclear warhead can only be activated if three separate officers agree,"
Iqhman said.
"In the United States, almost 20 years after the end of the Cold War, nuclear weapons still sit atop missiles, on hair-trigger alert, and it only takes two launch-control officers to activate a nuclear weapon. The U.S. government has persistently ignored arms control experts around the world who have said they should at least de-alert their weapons."

Iqhman also questioned the adequacy of U.S. procedures for handling nuclear weapons. He expressed particular concern about the August 29, 2007, incident in which six nuclear weapons were accidentally loaded under the wing of a B-52 by workers who did not observe routine inspection procedures and thought they were attaching conventional weapons to the B-52. The flight navigator should have caught their mistake, but he neglected to inspect the weapons as required. For several hours the nuclear weapons were in the air without anyone's knowledge.

"The United States needs to develop new protocols for storing and loading nuclear weapons, and it needs to do a better job of recruiting and training the personnel who handle them,"
Iqhman said.

Iqhman added the Pakistani government would be willing to offer technical advice and assistance to the United States on improving its nuclear weapons handling procedures. Speaking anonymously because of the issue's sensitivity, senior Pentagon officials said it is Washington's role to give, not receive, advice on nuclear weapons safety and surety issues.

Iqhman pointed out that the August 29 event was not an isolated incident; there have been at least 24 accidents involving nuclear weapons on U.S. planes. He mentioned a 1966 incident in which four nuclear weapons fell to the ground when two planes collided over Spain, as well as a 1968 fire that caused a plane to crash in Greenland with four hydrogen bombs aboard. In 1980, a Titan II missile in Arkansas exploded during maintenance, sending a nuclear warhead flying 600 feet through the air. In a remark that visibly annoyed a U.S. official present at the briefing, Iqhman described the U.S. nuclear arsenal as

"an accident waiting to happen."

Jay Keuse of MSNBC News asked Iqhman if Pakistan was in any position to be lecturing other countries given Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan's record of selling nuclear technology to other countries.

"All nuclear weapons states profess to oppose proliferation while helping select allies acquire nuclear weapons technology,"
Iqhman replied.
"The United States helped Britain and France obtain the bomb; France helped the Israelis; and Russia helped China. And China,"
he added coyly,
"is said by Western media sources to have helped Pakistan. So why can't Pakistan behave like everyone else?"

Iqhman's deputy, Col. Bom Zhalot also expressed concern about the temperament of the U.S. public, asking whether they had the maturity and self-restraint to be trusted with the ultimate weapon.

"Their leaders lecture us on the sanctity of life, and their president believes that every embryo is sacred, but they are the only country to have used these terrible weapons--not just once, but twice. Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the plane that bombed Hiroshima, said he never lost a night's sleep over killing 100,000 people, many of them women and children. That's scarcely human."

While Iqhman glared reproachfully at Zhalot for this rhetorical outburst, Zhalot continued:

"We also worry that the U.S. commander-in-chief has confessed to having been an alcoholic. Here in Pakistan, alcohol is 'haram,' so this isn't a problem for us. Studies have also found that one-fifth of U.S. military personnel are heavy drinkers. How many of those have responsibility for nuclear weapons?"

John G. Libb of the Washington Times asked if Americans were wrong to be concerned about Pakistan's nuclear stockpile given the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Pakistan. Colonel Zhalot replied

"Millions of Americans believe that these are the last days and that they will be raptured to heaven at the end of the world. You have a president who describes Jesus as his favorite philosopher, and one of the last remaining candidates in your presidential primaries is a preacher who doesn't believe in evolution. Many Pakistanis worry that the United States is being taken over by religious extremists who believe that a nuclear holocaust will just put the true believers on a fast track to heaven. We worry about a nutcase U.S. president destroying the world to save it."

U.S. diplomats in Pakistan declined comment.




December 29, 2007

Brasscheck TV: Pakistan and 9/11 - that MONEY TRAIL that isn't cold YET

Pakistan and 9/11



Protected by Bush

CIA = ISI (Pakistani intelligence) = al Queda

On October 1, 2001, did the FBI uncover evidence that Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed, the Director of the Pakistani Intelligence Service (the ISI) authorize the wiring of $100,000 to Florida to Mohammed Atta (supposed hijack ringleader of the 911 attack) through Omar Saeed Sheikh (an alleged ISI agent)?

Why did only a single US press outlet, the Wall Street Journal website, mention this connection in the editorial section (James Taranto writing) on October 10, 2001, saying it was an "internet only" story - when in fact it was a major story reported at great length in the main line Indian press?

Does this mean that Al-Queda was used as a tool by members of the American government in the same way that they used the Mujahdeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan?

December 28, 2007

Another good comment on the Pakistani situation ..

All this is incredibly interesting in light of the recent information that she had NO BULLET WOUNDS, and an autopsy was avoided!!


Couple of things with the Pakistan-situation, which aren’t adding up. As background, Pakistan government is claiming that they have a recording; and that the telecom conference/call shows AlQueda was involved. Here are the problems:

Ongoing Investigation

Normally, during an “ongoing” investigation, the last thing the government in the US would want to do was indicate what they knew or didn’t know. This would tip people off. It makes no sense for the Pakistanis — before apprehending those people supposedly on the tape — to disclose the information the Pakistanis have, their methods, or their suspicions. These should be kept confidential until the suspects are apprehended. Disclosing the information before apprehending anyone casts doubts about the motivations for the disclosure, the accuracy of the claims behind the information, and the credibility the government investigation is serious about finding someone.

Electronic Interception

Curiously, the Pakistanis want us to believe they have a recording, but they cannot explain how they knew — in advance — to target this phone/communication device; or, why — despite this information about the phone — they were unable to put energy into locating in physical space/on planet earth where these people were. It is backwards to have a recording of someone, not take action to detain them; however, know enough to have ongoing surveillance, but there is no apparent effort to ensure the conversations were recorded and acted upon for purposes of preventing an attack.

Questions

- How was the Pakistani government able to pinpoint the phone they were using, but unable to track that phone to a physical location, and prevent the attack; or quickly round up those supposedly involved?

- How many people are they monitoring, who are engaged in ongoing conversations, but they’re not doing anything about?

- If people were going “off line”, then why weren’t people sent into the area to find these people supposedly connected with the phone lines, instead of letting these “known people” wander around?

- How do they explain being able to track a phone line, but no ability to locate that person?

- Why are they disclosing — before apprehending — the identities of the people they think are involved?

Conclusions

The claim the Pakistani government is making are dubious. It does not seem credible that they would disclose — now — specific information about suspects, but not take steps to apprehend the people. Rather, the fact that they supposedly have these people “under surveillance” and have “recordings” suggests the opposite: There are no real recordings, they don’t know where the suspects are, as they should if they can monitor them.

Judgments

The transcript has been fabricated. There are no suspects. The claims AlQueda are making have not been captured on any ongoing surveillance or monitoring effort. The Pakistani government has no evidence. The people making claims have not been targeted through either electronic surveillance or physical detention or monitoring.

The Pakistani government appears to be lying and misrepresenting the status of the investigation. They do not appear to have any real information; and their “disclosure” of this information doesn’t mean the information is real, true, accurate, or signs of progress. It is our judgment the people who may ultimately be brought to trial may have nothing to do with any planning; and it is likely the electronic evidence used to convict them could be tainted, fabricated, and not survive cross-examination. The people currently being targeted, accused, or are “under surveillance” appear to be nothing more than convenient scapegoats. We have no confidence the investigation into the assassination will be untainted. We make no judgements as to the alleged complicity of ISI or who was involved with the assassination.


Latest Bhutto information ..

DID THE CIA HAVE FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE BHUTTO HIT?

THE CIA IS THE WORLD'S BIGGEST DRUG DEALER

Franklin's Focus + Henk Ruyssenaars

* Means: link below the article.

FPF - December 28th, 2007 - Today The Times in London in a story is one of the media writing about the fact that 'fingers will also be pointed at the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, (ISI) which has had close ties to the Islamists since the 1970s and has been used by successive Pakistani leaders to suppress political opposition. Ms Bhutto narrowly escaped an assassination attempt in October, when a suicide bomber struck at a rally in Karachi to welcome her back from exile.*

Which is logical, seeing the text and links below: Benazir Bhutto was a US/UK plant and a fraud. But another question that came to mind too, is: would in Pakistan a political killing in this fashion take place in the same city as where the Pakistani army, the secret service ISI and president Musharraf have their headquarters, in the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi? Putting the blame and suspicion squarely on their own doorstep?

Well, I don't think so. But it is of course an excellent way to put all the blame on Musharraf, whom Bhutto with her US junta advisers was supposed to replace at first, and logically Bhutto's followers want revenge, and thus most likely Musharraf is send to his forefathers. By the same agents who killed Bhutto. The regime change is a fact thereafter, and for the multinational cartel it's business as usual.

Apart from that: as far as I can remember, I've never heard of an assassin who first shoots, killing his victim, and than - even having a gun - finishes oneself and innocent bystanders of with a suicide bomb. The effect is greater that way, and all mainstream media wept crocodile tears. That's when one ought to get very suspicious and check and double check. And if you look at the links below you'll surely get the whole picture, which is global.

Personally I do agree with Franklin on this, and I think he is damn right when asking: Did the CIA Know About the Impending Murder of Benazir Bhutto? Because there's an interesting thing to keep in mind too, concerning this, and written last year:

Oil may have reached $50 a barrel, but heroin is worth 12 times its weight in gold, and is by far the most profitable commodity on the markets. A kilogram of heroin, worth $1,000 in Thailand, has a street value of nearly $1 million. That's some mark-up. A kilogram of cocaine can cost as little as $65 to produce, with a street value of approximately $500,000."

The writer calls the drug trade "fuel for the sick engine" and says that "Like the "War on Drugs," the "War on Terror" is a hoax. But it is more than a hoax. It is also a drug war. When seen in this regard, everything starts to make a perfect, dreadful sense.

IT MAY BE CRIMINAL, BUT HEY - IT'S JUST BUSINESS.*

Franklin's Focus 12/27/07 - If one is familiar with the history of Pakistan's ISI (Inter Services Intelligence) and its umbilical ties to the CIA, plus its authoritarian ethos, one can certainly suspect the ISI murdered Bhutto with the full foreknowledge and blessing of the CIA.

The ISI and CIA have long been partners. We are entitled to go so far as to say the CIA fathered the ISI. Creating fascist intelligence agencies in that part of the world is nothing new for the CIA. You may recall that Iran's savage Savak was an Iranian Gestapo-like spy and torture group created by the CIA. Its purpose was to keep the barbaric Shah on his throne and prevent Iran from moving to the left. Given the corrupt, bloody nature of his regime, the Shah needed a group like Savak to uphold his rule over a hapless Iran that had seen a popular
leader deposed by the CIA and replaced with the merciless Shah, who was completely under the control of the CIA.

THE SAVAK WAS RUTHLESSLY EFFICIENT

Given the power and brutality of Savak and the CIA support for the merciless Shah, it was a long time before the people of Iran were able to finally rise up in a massive revolution and throw out the Shah. As for the Savak, its officers and agents fled for their lives. (I sometimes wonder how many ended up with offices at Langley.)

I wanted to mention the creation of the Savak by the CIA because it's relevant to the murder of Bhutto. You see when the CIA was called upon to create a secret service in Pakistan, they used the ruthlessly efficient Savak as an exact model for the newly created ISI.

The ISI would become a kind of little brother of the CIA in two major ways. First, they became partners in the largest opium-heroin industry in the world. The poppy fields of northern Afghanistan would be their ground zero for the operation. Production facilities for heroin and opium were probably set up in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. From there, massive amounts of heroin were smuggled to Europe. Today the ISI-CIA heroin industry accounts for over 90% of all heroin consumed in Europe.*

The size of the profits can scarcely be imagined. The profit margins are astronomical. Since the Vietnam War, the CIA has probably garnered trillions. This massive wealth has given the CIA immense global power - a power to corrupt laws, lawmakers, judges, and so forth in any Third World country where the CIA wanted to support brutal dictatorships such as that of Pinochet in Chile.*

THE CIA IS THE WORLD'S BIGGEST DRUG DEALER

The CIA has been the world's biggest drug dealer ever since the Vietnam War, which gave the CIA its chance to take over the Golden Triangle and begin supplying the US, Europe, and any other country with a sizable addict population. (The bastards were shipping heroin into the US sewn in the bellies of dead American GIs! Yes, the USAF was involved.) Today that business must run in the trillions. A recent spate of crashes of planes carrying 20 and 30 tons of cocaine are suggestive. For every crashed plane, hundreds, if not thousands, of fully loaded cargo planes are not crashing.*

Columbia became another Golden Triangle. The CIA used Colombian gangsters to set up the cultivation, processing, and shipping of cocaine to the US. The so-called drug lords of Colombia were agents of the CIA. The reason the drug war in Colombia never ends should be obvious. When a coke ring is occasionally busted in Colombia it is because it has refused to render onto Caesar that which Caesar says is his. (I should mention that Governor Bill Clinton was a major player in allowing vast amounts of cocaine into the US via a small airport in Mena, Arkansas.)

BACK TO THE MURDER OF BHUTTO

Her possible ascension to the presidency was something the CIA-ISI cocaine industry would not long countenance. I maintain that the murder of Bhutto was known about in the White House before it happened. To a large extent, our Shadow Government has been financed by drug and arms smuggling. These two industries are zealously protected. The members of our Shadow Gov. [SG], of course, are also protecting huge offshore bank accounts.* Major powers within the SG own enormous fortunes.

My longtime readers are familiar with a group known as the Angel of Death.* Back in the old days, I had an access to that group, a collection of master hackers who had uncovered huge offshore bank accounts owned by almost everybody in the US Congress. When they started removing the funds from these accounts and depositing them in the US Treasury, they signed their death warrants. All but one of the group was murdered. The one who survived is supposedly still alive and ensconced under a fake name in some unknown prison, placed in solitary for life. (My main contact and font of information during the halcyon days of Focus is now working for a petroleum magazine. He is their number one investigative reporter. He is happily married and settled down now and doing what he does best - exposing crooks. I occasionally hear from him. I'm glad he survived.)

The rest and working links at Url.: http://tinyurl.com/27rb3b
Henk Ruyssenaars,

A few points worth remembering;

A- Inter Services Intelligence (ISI); grew form the strength of sixty (60) personnel, to its current strengths of an estimated six hundred and fifty to seven hundred and fifty thousands (650,000 ~ 750,000) personnel, largely due to the CIA funding, and the transit fees for drugs.

B- Bhutto in her initial visit to Pakistan had arranged an aircraft load of supporters to accompany her from Dubai to Pakistan. The air trip started late due to the 'supporters' celebrations in the aircraft isles, and continued to be a farce included the pilots threats to eject all the unruly passengers whom would not sit in their seats, however the trip was concluded with the passengers running around the isles and celebrating during the landing, and it was followed by a an armoured bus perambulating the nine miles distance for the duration of eleven hours that was finally concluded in the initial bombings.

C- The main reason for B was to show the levels of 'support' that Bhutto enjoyed, however the fears of people not turning up, and or few turning up were a prime source of worry, for the Anglo US power brokers. Hence it could be argued that the 'bombings' were in fact a further attempt in raising the popularity of Bhutto through the sympathy for the 'underdog'.

D- Although it could be argued that C was a hastily arranged bombing to knock her off her perch, but fact that Bhutto just minutes/seconds prior to the detonations, had moved from the top of the bus, and into the secure armoured plated section somehow does not aid this line of thought.

E- Senator Arlen Spectre was visiting the Pakistan embassy in Washington very early on in the morning, prior to the latest revelations about the 'magic sun roof handle' theory getting floated. (JFK Magic Bullet Inventor)

F- Bhutto in an interview with Frost on al Jazeera, goes on record about groups in Afghanistan, and Pakistan as well as the security official in Pakistan who are bent on killing her, and then elaborates about the connections of the security official to Omar Sheikh, who 'murdered Osama bin Laden', as a matter of factly, and without any questions from David Frost!

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ]

-ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ
Note the sentence is at 6:12, however start taking it in from 3:40 on.


G- Bhutto, and her threats to all and sundry in Pakistan, put paid to her dream of getting the US soldiers to back her up in her fight. However the coterie of the strange, and venal supporters do not discount the hit being arranged by the very same bunch of supporters, whom had been given the nod and the wink after her meeting with Hameed Karzai the Mayor of Kabul.


Round up of articles on Benazir Bhutto ...

Not mentioned in any of these "reports" is(1) the fact that Pakistan is a fine mess due to the "meddling" of Henry Kissinger (who was in India when Benazir returned to Pakistan.) Henry is now a policy adviser to John McCain! And his tone on Iran had to be adjusted after the National Intelligence Estimate came out; to do the spin he had Alexis Debat do his dirty work ... and yet he was extraordinarily MUM about Benazir's return.

(2) what did people really think Benazir went to Pakistan FOR?? Are there not Other Leaders - or is she the exact definition of power gone totally mad? I know what I think. I don't think her life was worth the original 140 dead (and we now know the "worshipping hordes" there were overstated and PAID to show up!) and this certainly shows what a risky political gambles the rich are willing to take with Other People's lives.

(3) Pakistan is a social laboratory for BuZh and Cheney, a trial balloon. Who REALLY benefits by keeping a state completely in a ongoing crisis? The world's one huge superpower, that is who . and who benefits the MOST - those who represent the government AND Big Business at the same time: ergo, HALLIBURTON, KRB, and Carlyle group. Think about it.

(4) Was it a suicide bomber .. OR .. wuz it something else. The press is very contradictory! Smacks of OTHER known assassinations such as JFK, 9/11 .. At the bottom I have placed the raw story comments on the NEW STORY .. and the next item is the raw news story ...

I wonder what problems the suicide bomber had, how much the jackals paid him to take care of his whole family by "merely" putting into play this one horrible scene of death.

While I may be SAD that another person on this planet has died another bloody death, I think it can be safely said that given the situation, Benazir Bhutto could have better served the cause of Pakistani interests by staying OUT OF THAT COUNTRY. She would then be able to be a mother to her children and the jackals would have to figure out someone else to do in.

Veeger

Riots in Pakistan after assassination


Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:03 pm (PST)
Riots break out in aftermath of Bhutto's death
Shyema Sajjad, Special to CTV.ca
Thu. Dec. 27 2007
http://www.ctv. ca/servlet/ ArticleNews/ story/CTVNews/ 20071227/ karachi_report_ 0712\
27/20071227? hub=TopStories


KARACHI, Pakistan -- The major cities in Pakistan, including the garrison city of Rawalpindi, have all broken out in chaos after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, chairperson of Pakistan People's Party.

The buildings are being torched and there are people out on the streets yelling anti-government slogans, attacking vehicles on the road. In Karachi, riots have broken out on the streets and people are leaving their cars parked on the road and walking home to avoid being attacked.

In residential areas in Karachi, such as the Defence Housing Authority, people are running around with sticks and stones, attacking cars passing by. Gas stations are being torched and there is mayhem among the groups who don't know whom to blame and what implications
lie ahead for the country.

There is a lot of apprehension about what lies next and the people who are out on the streets are being motivated by sadness and anger.

Bhutto, a key player in Pakistan's upcoming election, was a hero to many. Her death has caused mixed emotions as people vent their anger and confusion out on the streets. There is also a fear that this was a ploy to delay Pakistan's democratic process.

Weddings were left abandoned and restaurant meals left untouched as people raced home and all public places closed down.

A big explosion occurred at 9 p.m., local time, opposite Park Towers, one of the largest malls in Karachi. People across the mall were stoning cars and shouting PPP slogans as terrified shoppers rush to escape.

Anti-Pervez Musharraf slogans are being yelled out in the cities. And in Larkana, Sindh, people are walking around with guns on the street. At least 10 banks have been burnt in Larkana, according to local news alerts. Buses are also being torched to block major bridges leading to
Karachi's industrial areas.

The people on the streets, of all ages, are large groups of young men. Election posters and banners are being torched and an address was made to the nation by President Pervez Musharraf who stated that the flag will be raised at half-mast for three days in Pakistan.

Gun shots can be heard in Karachi's residential areas and not a person can be seen on the streets of the quieter areas. Houses are being locked and bolted to avoid attacks and no one is stepping out of their homes. With phone lines jammed and television stations randomly going off-air, people are making sure they have supplies in case electricity is turned off as well.

Even those who were not particularly in favour of her policies are shocked and saddened by her violent and sudden death and the mixed emotions can be seen on the streets where people are turning to violence as their confusion and anger prevails.

Shyema Sajjad, a journalist in Karachi, attended Ryerson University's journalism school in Toronto last year.

===

Pakistan's Bhutto Assassinated at Rally

By SADAQAT JAN and ZARAR KHAN,AP
2007-12-27
http://news. aol.com/story/ _a/pakistans- bhutto-assassina ted-at-rally/ 200712270819\
09990001#addNewCmmn t


RAWALPINDI, Pakistan (Dec. 27) -- Pakistan opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Thursday in a suicide attack. Her death threw the campaign for critical Jan. 8 parliamentary elections into chaos and stoked fears of mass protests and violence across the
nuclear-armed nation, an important U.S. ally in the war on terrorism.

At least 20 others were also killed in the attack on a campaign rally where the 54-year-old Bhutto had just spoken.

Her supporters erupted in anger and grief after her death, attacking police and burning tires and election campaign posters in several cities. At the hospital where she died, some smashed glass and wailed, chanting slogans against President Pervez Musharraf.

Musharraf blamed Islamic extremists for Bhutto's death and said he would redouble his efforts to fight them.

"This is the work of those terrorists with whom we are engaged in war," he said in a nationally televised speech. "I have been saying that the nation faces the greatest threats from these terrorists. ... We will not rest until we eliminate these terrorists and root them out."

Musharraf convened an emergency meeting with his senior staff, where they were expected to discuss whether to postpone the elections, an official at the Interior Ministry said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks.

The attacker struck just minutes after Bhutto addressed thousands of supporters in the garrison city of Rawalpindi, 8 miles south of Islamabad. She was shot in the neck and chest by the attacker, who then blew himself up, said Rehman Malik, Bhutto's security adviser.

Sardar Qamar Hayyat, a leader from Bhutto's party, said he was standing about 10 yard away from her vehicle at the time of the attack.

"She was inside the vehicle and was coming out from the gate after addressing the rally when some of the youths started chanting slogans in her favor. Then I saw a smiling Bhutto emerging from the vehicle's roof and responding to their slogans," he said.

"Then I saw a thin, young man jumping toward her vehicle from the back and opening fire. Moments later, I saw her speeding vehicle going away," he added.

Bhutto was rushed to the hospital and taken into emergency surgery. She died about an hour after the attack.

"At 6:16 p.m., she expired," said Wasif Ali Khan, a member of Bhutto's party who was at Rawalpindi General Hospital.

"The surgeons confirmed that she has been martyred," Bhutto's lawyer Babar Awan said.

Bhutto's supporters at the hospital exploded in anger, smashing the glass door at the main entrance of the emergency unit. Others burst into tears. One man with a flag of Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party tied around his head was beating his chest.

"I saw her with my own eyes sitting in a vehicle after addressing the rally. Then, I heard an explosion," Tahir Mahmood, 55, said sobbing. "I am in shock. I cannot believe that she is dead."

Many chanted slogans against Musharraf, accusing him of complicity in her killing.

"We repeatedly informed the government to provide her proper security and appropriate equipment ... but they paid no heed to our requests," Malik said.

As news of her death spread, angry supporters took to the streets.

In Karachi, shop owners quickly closed their businesses as protesters set tires on fire on the roads, torched several vehicles and burned a gas station, said Fayyaz Leghri, a local police official. Gunmen shot and wounded two police officers, he said.

In Rawalpindi, the site of the attack, Bhutto's supporters burned election posters from the ruling party and attacked police, who fled from the scene. Violence also broke out in Lahore, Multan, Peshawar and many other parts of Pakistan, where Bhutto's supporters set fire to a bus, pelted stones at shops and blocked city roads.

Musharraf, who announced three days of mourning for Bhutto, urged calm.

"I want to appeal to the nation to remain peaceful and exercise restraint," he said.

Nawaz Sharif, another former premier and opposition leader, arrived at the hospital and sat silently next to Bhutto's body.

"Benazir Bhutto was also my sister, and I will be with you to take the revenge for her death," he said. "Don't feel alone. I am with you. We will take the revenge on the rulers."

Speaking to the BBC, Sharif also questioned whether to hold the elections.

"I think perhaps none of us is inclined to think of the elections," he said. "We would have to sit down and take a very serious look at the current situation together with the People's Party and see what we have to do in the coming days."

Hours earlier, four people were killed at a rally for Sharif when his supporters clashed with backers of Musharraf near Rawalpindi.

Bhutto's death will leave a void at the top of her party, the largest political group in the country, as it heads into the elections. It also fueled fears that the crucial vote could descend into violence.

Pakistan is considered a vital U.S. ally in the fight against al-Qaida and other Islamic extremists including the Taliban. Osama bin Laden and his inner circle are believed to be hiding in lawless northwest Pakistan along the border with Afghanistan.

In Washington, the State Department condemned the attack.

"It demonstrates that there are still those in Pakistan who want to subvert reconciliation and efforts to advance democracy," deputy spokesman Tom Casey said.

The United States has for months been encouraging Musharraf to reach an accommodation with the opposition, particularly Bhutto, who was seen as having a wide base of support in Pakistan. Her party had been widely expected to do well in next month's elections.

Pakistan was just emerging from another crisis after Musharraf declared a state of emergency on Nov. 3, and used sweeping powers to round up thousands of his opponents and fire Supreme Court justices. He ended emergency rule Dec. 15 and subsequently relinquished his role as army chief, a key opposition demand. Bhutto had been an outspoken critic of Musharraf's imposition of emergency rule.

Educated at Harvard and Oxford universities, Bhutto served twice as Pakistan's prime minister between 1988 and 1996.

Her father was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, scion of a wealthy landowning family in southern Pakistan and founder of the populist Pakistan People's Party. The elder Bhutto was president and then prime minister of Pakistan before his ouster in a 1977 military coup. Two years later, he was executed by the government of Gen. Zia-ul Haq after being convicted of engineering the murder of a political opponent.

Bhutto had returned to Pakistan from an eight-year exile on Oct. 18. On the same day, she narrowly escaped injury when her homecoming parade in Karachi was targeted in a suicide attack that killed more than 140 people.

Islamic militants linked to al-Qaida and the Taliban hated Bhutto for her close ties to the Americans and support for the war on terrorism. A local Taliban leader reportedly threatened to greet Bhutto's return to the country with suicide bombings.

At the scene of Thursday's bombing, an Associated Press reporter saw body parts and flesh scattered at the back gate of the Liaqat Bagh park, where Bhutto had spoken. He counted about 20 bodies, including police, and could see many other wounded people.

Police cordoned off the street with white and red tape, and rescuers rushed to put victims in ambulances as people wailed nearby.

The clothing of some victims was shredded and people put party flags over their bodies. Police caps and shoes littered the asphalt.

Hundreds of riot police had manned security checkpoints around the venue. It was Bhutto's first public meeting in Rawalpindi since she came back to the country.

In November, Bhutto had also planned a rally in the city, but Musharraf forced her to cancel it, citing security fears.

In recent weeks, suicide bombers have repeatedly targeted security forces in Rawalpindi, where Musharraf stays and the Pakistan army has its headquarters.

===

Bhutto Assassinated in Attack on Rally
By Salman Masood and Graham Bowley
The New York Times
Thursday 27 December 2007
http://www.truthout .org/docs_ 2006/122707Q. shtml

Rawalpindi, Islamabad - An attack on a political rally killed the Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto near the capital, Islamabad, Thursday. Witnesses said Ms. Bhutto was fired upon at close range before the blast, and an official from her party said Ms. Bhutto was further injured by the explosion, which was apparently caused by a suicide attacker.

Ms. Bhutto was declared dead by doctors at a hospital in Rawalpindi at 6:16 p.m. after the doctors had tried to resuscitate her for thirty-five minutes. She had shrapnel injuries, the doctors said. At least a dozen more people were killed in the attack.

"At 6:16 p.m. she expired," said Wasif Ali Khan, a member of Ms. Bhutto's party who was at Rawalpindi General Hospital where she was taken after the attack, according to The Associated Press.Hundreds of supporters had gathered at the political rally, which was being held
at Liaqut Bagh, a park that is a common venue for political rallies and speeches, in Rawalpindi, the garrison city adjacent to the capital.

Amid the confusion after the explosion, the site was littered with pools of blood. Shoes and caps of party workers were lying on the asphalt, and shards of glass were strewn about the ground. Pakistani television cameras captured images of ambulances pushing through crowds of dazed and injured people at the scene of the assassination.

CNN reported that witnesses at the scene described the assassin as opening fire on Ms. Bhutto and her entourage, hitting her at least once in the neck and once in the chest, before blowing himself up.

Farah Ispahani, a party official from Ms. Bhutto's party, said: "It is too soon to confirm the number of dead from the party's side. Private television channels are reporting twenty dead." Television channels were also quoting police sources as saying that at least 14
people were dead.

At the hospital where Ms. Bhutto was taken, a large number of police began to cordon off the area as angry party workers smashed windows. Many protesters shouted "Musharraf Dog". One man was crying hysterically, saying "O my sister has been killed." Amid the crowd,
dozens of people beat their chests, and chanted slogans against Mr. Musharraf.

The attack immediately raised questions about whether parliamentary elections scheduled for January will go ahead or be postponed.

Ms. Bhutto was the target of a suicide attack in October in Karachi when she returned from exile to Pakistan. That attack, caused by two bombs exploding just seconds apart, narrowly missed Ms. Bhutto but killed scores of people, including many of her party workers. Ms. Bhutto had been warned by the government before her return to Pakistan that she faced threats to her security. She did not blame the president, Pervez Musharraf, for the Karachi attack but said extremist Islamic groups who wanted to take over the country were behind the attacks, which killed 134 people.

The attack Thursday in Rawalpindi is the latest blow to Pakistan's treacherous political situation. It comes just days after President Pervez Musharraf lifted a state of emergency, imposed in part because of terrorist threats.

Ms. Bhutto, 54, returned from self-imposed exile to Pakistan this year to present herself as the answer to the nation's troubles: a tribune of democracy in a state that has been under military rule for eight years, and the leader of the country's largest opposition political party, founded by her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, one of Pakistan's most flamboyant and democratically inclined prime ministers.

But her record in power, and the dance of veils she has deftly performed since her return -- one moment standing up to the Pakistan president, General Musharraf, then next seeming to accommodate him, and never quite revealing her actual intentions -- has stirred as much
distrust as hope among Pakistanis.

A graduate of Harvard and Oxford, she brought the backing of Washington and London, where she impresses with her political lineage, her considerable charm and her persona as a female Muslim leader.

But with these accomplishments, Ms. Bhutto also brought controversy, and a legacy among Pakistanis as a polarizing figure who during her two turbulent tenures as prime minister, first from 1988 to 1990 and again from 1993 to 1996, often acted imperiously and impulsively.

She faced deep questions about her personal probity in public office, which led to corruption cases against her in Switzerland, Spain and Britain, as well as in Pakistan.

Ms. Bhutto saw herself as the inheritor of her father's mantle,
often spoke of how he encouraged her to study the lives of legendary
female leaders ranging from Indira Gandhi to Joan of Arc.

Following the idea of big ambition, Ms. Bhutto called herself chairperson for life of the opposition Pakistan Peoples Party, a seemingly odd title in an organization based on democratic ideals and
one she has acknowledged quarreling over with her mother, Nusrat Bhutto, in the early 1990s.

Saturday night at the diplomatic reception, Ms. Bhutto showed how she could aggrandize. Three million people came out to greet her in Karachi on her return last month, she said, calling it Pakistan's "most historic" rally. In fact, crowd estimates were closer to 200,000, many of them provincial party members who had received small amounts of money to make the trip.

Such flourishes led questioning in Pakistan about the strength of her democratic ideals in practice, and a certain distrust, particularly amid signs of back-room deal-making with General
Musharraf, the military ruler she opposed.

"She believes she is the chosen one, that she is the daughter of Bhutto and everything else is secondary," said Feisal Naqvi, a corporate lawyer in Lahore who knew Ms. Bhutto.

When Ms. Bhutto was re-elected to a second term as Prime Minister, her style of government combined both the traditional and the modern, said Zafar Rathore, a senior civil servant at the time.

But her view of the role of government differed little from the classic notion in Pakistan that the state was the preserve of the ruler who dished out favors to constituents and colleagues, he recalled.

As secretary of interior, responsible for the Pakistani police force, Mr. Rathore, who is now retired, said he tried to get an appointment with Ms. Bhutto to explain the need for accountability in the force. He was always rebuffed, he said.

Finally, when he was seated next to her in a small meeting, he said to her, "I've been waiting to see you," he recounted. "Instantaneously, she said: 'I am very busy, what do you want. I'll
order it right now.' "

She could not understand that a civil servant might want to talk about policies, he said. Instead, he said, "she understood that when all civil servants have access to the sovereign, they want to ask for something."

But until her death, Ms. Bhutto ruled the party with an iron hand, jealously guarding her position, even while leading the party in absentia for nearly a decade.

Members of her party saluted her return to Pakistan, saying she was the best choice against General Musharraf. Chief among her attributes, they said, was sheer determination.

Ms. Bhutto's marriage to Asif Ali Zardari was arranged by her mother, a fact that Ms. Bhutto has often said was easily explained, even for a modern, highly educated Pakistani woman.

To be acceptable to the Pakistani public as a politician she could not be a single woman, and what was the difference, she would ask, between such a marriage and computer dating?

Mr. Zardari is known for his love of polo and other perquisites of the good life like fine clothes, expensive restaurants, homes in Dubai and London, and an apartment in New York.

He was minister of investment in Ms. Bhutto's second government. And it was from that perch that he made many of the deals that haunted Ms. Bhutto, and himself, in the courts.

There were accusations that the couple had illegally taken $1.5 billion from the state. It is a figure that Ms. Bhutto has vigorously contested.

Indeed, one of Ms. Bhutto's main objectives in seeking to return to power was to restore the reputation of her husband, who was jailed for eight years in Pakistan, said Abdullah Riar, a former senator in the Pakistani Parliament and a former colleague of Ms. Bhutto's.

"She told me, 'Time will prove he is the Nelson Mandela of Pakistan,' " Mr. Riar said.

Salman Masood reported from Islamabad, Pakistan, and Graham Bowley from New York.

===

reader comment

Before I start writing anything , I would like to confirm that I am against any and all political assassinations, except for the confirmed-war- criminals who shall even need a proper court condemnation. ...... previously.

Benazir Butho was assassinated hours ago she is a hero for some........ .and "a rich-and-powerful- corrupt-lady" for the others...... .
I know no details , but one or two facts I take into my consideration
in my judgement , what ever it is worth....
1- she inherited her power
2- she was awfully rich
3- she was accused of corruption and then even pardoned , later on
4- The USA never disapproved of her

Otherwise ,
I offer my condolences to her supporters and her family what ever she was or not were.......
democracy or rather plurality has made one step backwards.

Raja Chemayel

PS :
most reporters are asking whether she died from bullets or from that blast....... .....but difference does it make ??

===

PAKISTAN: Benazir Bhutto the ultimate sacrifice

by Beena Sarwar
www.montrealmuslimnews.net

LAHORE (Dec 27): Benazir Bhutto has paid the heaviest price possible for her insistence on engaging in participatory, democratic politics in Pakistan. Bhutto was killed on Thursday evening in what was apparently a suicide bombing following gunshots that injured her as she was leaving a pre-election rally she had just addressed in the garrison town of Rawalpindi.

Twice-elected former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, the 54-year old mother of three children, died in hospital in Rawalpindi at about 6.15 pm – barely an hour after an unidentified man fired shots at her as she left the rally venue, a fenced off park, before blowing himself up. Some twenty others were killed and dozens more injured.

"She feared something like this would happen, but she was so brave," said PPP spokesperson Farhatullah Babar, who was with Benazir Bhutto at the rally minutes before the tragedy struck, speaking to IPS from Rawalpindi shortly before Bhutto's body was transferred to her
hometown Larkana on a C-130 plane. "She waved at the people, and then there was firing and the blast."

"I don't think people realize this, but she was one of the last hopes we had in Pakistan for a peaceful transition to democracy," said Karachi-based economist Haris Gazdar, who supported Bhutto's much-criticised `deal' with the military government that allowed her to return to the country and participate in politics.

President and Chief of Army Staff General Pervez Musharraf's National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) promulgated on Oct. 5, a day before the presidential elections that he was a nominee for despite being in military uniform, gave Bhutto immunity against corruption charges brought against her after she was ousted from power in 1996 (none of these charges were proved in court). In return, her Pakistan People's Party (PPP) lent the election legitimacy by abstaining from the vote – the rest of the opposition boycotted the proceedings.

Explaining his support for Bhutto, Gazdar added, "The Americans think we are a dangerous state, and they want to come and sort things out here. This was a chance to do this peacefully. Make no mistake about it, the state is responsible for her death. They may think that by removing the vehicle for a peaceful change, they can stop the change. But that will not happen. Now that the peaceful mediator has been killed, they (Americans) will use armed force."

"I was nine when ZAB was killed by a General. Now my son is nine and another general has killed his daughter. I grew up with Benazir. It's a personal loss. I want to cry forever," text-messaged a lawyer in Lahore. The military regime of General Ziaul Haq overthrew and later executed the democratically elected prime minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (ZAB), Benazir's father, in 1979.

News of the tragic incident ignited violence all over the country, particularly in Sindh, Bhutto's home province. "They've shut down all the shops, and there is firing all around," said Abdul Jabbar who works as a driver in the Sindh capital and Pakistan's largest city and business center Karachi. "People are just overcome with grief."

By 9 pm, violence had claimed at least five lives in Karachi. Protestors in Sindh evacuated two trains and set them on fire. Angry mobs attacked police stations and other symbols of state authority. Commuters were reported to be stranded in towns and cities all over
the province.

Benazir Bhutto had chosen to return to Pakistan after almost nine years of exile, leaving a comfortable life of exile in London and Dubai, defying warnings by Musharraf to delay her arrival due to the danger of suicide attacks.

"This is why I am here," she said, radiant atop her armoured truck soon after her arrival from Dubai at Karachi on Oct 18. Waving to the sea of people that surrounded her truck as far as the eye could see, she added as thousands of arms rose in response, "These people are the reason I am here."

Hours later, her slow-moving convoy bogged down by thousands of exuberant supporters on foot had only covered a few kilometers when two bombs struck soon after midnight. Initially thought to be a suicide attack, the blasts claimed over 130 lives and 500 injuries.

Addressing a press conference the following day, a defiant Bhutto implied the involvement of Pakistan's intelligence agencies in the attacks by mentioning three anonymous men whom she said she had named in a letter of Oct 16 to Musharraf. "I said that if something happens to me, I will hold them responsible rather than militant groups like the Taliban, Al Qaeda or the Pakistani Taliban."

The PPP also demanded the removal of the Intelligence Bureau chief, Ijaz Shah, hinting at Pakistani intelligence agencies' linkage with militancy. Bhutto's later claim that the Oct 18 blasts were remote- controlled further implied the involvement of forces other than the `religious militants' who are traditionally held responsible for such acts.

Despite the threats, Bhutto hit the campaign trail after the Election Commission announced on Nov 20 that polls would be held on January 8, 2008. With elections barely two weeks away, Bhutto was engaged in a series of public rallies around the country. Also on the campaign trail was her major political rival, another twice-elected former prime minster who like Bhutto had recently returned from several years of exile, Nawaz Sharif of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). Despite their political rivalry, the two leaders had developed what Sharif termed as a "rapport" over the last couple of years. In May 2006, the two exiled leaders in London signed a Charter of Democracy aimed at pushing the military out of Pakistani politics.

Speaking to the media from the hospital in Rawalpindi where he arrived soon after hearing of the incident, Bhutto's death, Sharif termed it as "very tragic". He said that the tragedy reflected
a "lapse in security" and said that the government should have taken greater measures to protect her.

As they embarked on their election campaigns, the two leaders drew huge crowds marked by a passion that the `kings' party', the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) was unable to muster. The campaigning was also marked by violence. Several political workers, mostly PPP, died in various incidents. On Dec 20, a suicide bomb in a mosque in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) killed over 20 people and injured 200 in an attack apparently aimed at former PPP stalwart and ex-interior minister Aftab Sherpao. On Dec 27, barely three hours before the blast that killed Bhutto, gunfire killed four PML-N supporters in a welcome rally for Nawaz Sharif outside the capital city Islamabad.

Bhutto's decision to contest elections "under protest" went against the move to boycott the polls, initiated by `civil society' -- lawyers, students, human rights activists, non-government organisations and the smaller political parties – who argued that participating in the elections would only legitimize Musharraf's role in Pakistani politics. Bhutto maintained that a boycott would not solve anything. Her stand forced Sharif to reconsider his initial position and announce that his party would contest rather than boycotting the polls.

The participation of these political forces posed a major challenge to the PML-Q which ruled the roost along with Musharraf for five years since the 2002 general elections that Bhutto and Sharif had both been barred from contesting. Democratic electoral politics were also expected to push back the `jihadists', the right-wing religious parties who had joined hands as the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) and made significant electoral inroads during the 2002 elections. MMA was also weakened by internal divisions as some of its components were in the boycott camp while others were contesting elections.

Bhutto's assassination "sends a very frightening signal to those who aim to pursue liberal politics in Pakistan," commented Ali Dayan Hasan, Pakistan-based South Asia Researcher for Human Rights Watch. "This will leave a huge vacuum at the heard of Pakistani politics. It is the most significant political event to happen in Pakistan since the death of General Zia." Gen. Zia's death in 1988 had paved the way for fresh elections that brought Benazir Bhutto into power as the world's first Muslim woman prime minister. Condoling with Bhutto's family and other affected people in a brief, televised address, President Musharraf announced a three-day mourning period during which the Pakistani flag will be flown at half-mast.

"It is important now for Asif Ali Zardari (Bhutto's husband) to call for peace, and to give Benazir Bhutto a decent burial that she deserves," said Nusrat Javeed, the banned head of current affairs for Aaj Television who appeared in a special transmission along with another banned host, Talat Hussain. "We need to sit and think, and transform the grief and the anger into strength."

Police abandoned security posts before Bhutto assassination

Nick Juliano
Published: Friday December 28, 2007

del.icio.us del.icio.us | StumbleUpon

Print This Email This

No autopsy performed on body; docs say bullet wounds not found

Police abandoned their security posts shortly before Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto's assassination Thursday, according to a journalist present at the time, and unanswerable questions remain about the cause of her death, because an autopsy was never performed.



Read more HERE


“The report says she had head injuries – an irregular patch – and the X-ray doesn’t show any bullet in the head. So it was probably the shrapnel or any other thing has struck her in her said. That damaged her brain, causing it to ooze and her death.”

Reading this rubbish makes me feel like a victim of shrapnel.
--


This is such a clusterf*k, I now think the Bush Administration is somehow implicated in this. Absolute incompetence abounds:

lack of police security
no autopsy
no "Plan B" for engagement
Bush's support for Musharraf
no bullet wound?!?


At first I thought that it was, as being widely discussed, an internal terrorist attack; there were plenty of wingnut groups out to get her.
But the absolute chaos, with no fix in sight, just smacks of the Bush/Cheney gang.


If you watch the video (as seen on CNN) released by Pakistan of Bhutto's last moments, look in the crowd & you can see a guy filming her with his cellphone- he's quite a but closer to her than the man behind the released video is.
I wonder where that & his cell-vid is.


They must have studied the JFK storyline and took it from there.We'll never know the real deal.


look at the video released by Pakistan just moments ago. There's a guy in crowd filming her with his cell phone. I wonder where he & his video are. The cell phone guy is much closer than the man behind the Interior Minitry video.


on of them new-fangled sound-technology weapon or theresuch


WHAT THE FUUUUUUUUUUUUCK?

A SUNROOF KILLED HER?
NO AUTOPSY, GUARDS ABANDONING THEIR POSTS, BULLETS FLYING AND BOMBS EXPLODING...AND A SUNROOF GETS HER?

AND OUR FRIENDS ALI QAEDA AND THE SEVEN THIEVES "CLAIM" RESPONSIBILITY?

ARE WE IN CARTOON LAND?

IS ANYBODY PAYING ATTENTION HERE?


Kennedy and Lincoln style hit,... To kill the king you need the help of his guards.... Sounds like a plot out of the Jesuit play book! No one does it better than the society of Jesus!


"Perhaps more shockingly, an attendee at the rally where Bhutto was killed says police charged with protecting her 'abandoned their posts,' leaving just a handful of Bhutto's own bodyguards protecting her."

Well! What do you expect in a nation of heathens? That could never happen here.

[JFK assassination: Secret Service Standdown — view video]
___________


Well, I don't think it has to be a very complicated plot to imagine that the little dictator Mushareff conveniently ends his "takeover", announces free elections, kills the only real opposition, and then the bungling and obfuscating take over.


yes...just like JFK and 9/11...conflicting stories, bungled investigations...this has MONKEY written ALL over it!...


All I can say is, do they think people are that f**king stupid?

All day long, "bullet wounds to neck and chest... and look, there's the gun on the ground." They must have shown that gun a million times and repeated the first story all day long.

Of course it's our old friend, the bogeyman, "Al Qaeda!" Damn, they're good. They're everywhere!

I pity ANYONE who believes this story for it must be difficult to function in life without the slightest bit of reason or logic to work with.


She bumped her head and now she's dead??

Har Har! Who makes this shit up???


Interestingly, this morning I heard that al Qaeda claimed responsibility for this and said a Pashtun volunteer was the man who blew himself up. (on MSNBC) It reeks of 9/11.

We had the names of the hijackers, and all sorts of info BEFORE any real investigation could be launched. Then there was no congressional investigation until AFTER citizens made a ruckus.

No investigation, no autopsy.

The ones who gain the most from this murder are Bush and Musharraf.
hmmmm


Islamic custom is to bury the dead as quickly as possible. The coverup was in place before Bhutto was assasinated. Destroy the evidence so no one is to blame and no one can answer for it. Her death was as predictable as the cover-up afterwards. Hardly a surprise to me....


Lets all blame the terrorists. Okay which one? Would you please step forward? Who are the terrorists now? All terrorist groups are guilty until someone figures out what really happened. That will never happen. No one is innocent here. Who do you trust to tell you the truth. The President of Pakistan? The Prime Minister? George Bush? Who will stand up and tell the truth? Who do you believe?

We live in scary times.

The truth will set you free.
We therfore are all enslaved.....


Well it appears that the continuation of the same old BS just keeps marching on.

There is no way anyone can convince me that this story is true. I believe this news report is an attempt to lessen the uproar in Pakistian. Some bull-headed nut cooked up this storyline to prevent the US $$ from loosing more value.

After all, this was somewhat of an unpredictible tragedy that was not played out between Bush/Cheney/Rice/Hadley & Perez, et al. Although, Gates made a smirky remark news reporters that al Qeada was becoming more active in Pakistian, (Dec 21, 2007). It doesn't seem as though the had the chance to perfect their plan very well.

The people's reaction to Buhtto's assassination was not at all expected and somehow the elitist have the burden of saving the world of finanical ruin.

So there you have it folks, the best story plot ever played without an official investigation of any kind..just a mere made up storyline.


same crap happened with indira ghandhi and her sikh 'guards.' power enjoys power. let the pakistanis who are really devoted to democracy get to the bottom of this; we have our own neo-cons and religious fascists to deal with.


so much for the single bullet theory...


People don't die immeadiatly from even massive head wounds. Had her skull been fractured it would have taken at least 3 days to die. The Mossad is on overtime trying to get us into a full scale war in the middle east before the Chimp leaves office. Or maybe so the Chimp


There is video, but it's not great. You can see it at the CNN link.

In the video you can see something that looks like a square hatch door open on the top of the SUV between the bomb and Bhutto. It looks about 3-4" thick. Presumably the armored sunroof. That would've been blown closed by the shockwave, and with her head only 12-18" out of the top before the attack started, she would have been in the way.

The shockwave moves at something like a mile per second, and a heavy door flapping in that breeze would be deadly. So it's at least possible to explain without believing she just "bumped her head while ducking" and fell over dead.

But the AP gave anonymity to one of the surgeons who worked on her when he described two bullet wounds which weren't there. The AP should name the doctor, who has some explaining to do.


How many ministers are shoveling shit over there? For Pete's sake, you'd think we were listening to a WH press briefing with Feigna Spitshitto at the dais while reporters grasp frantically for rolls of toilet paper whenever she opens her mouth!

Yesterday we had bullets ... bullets ... shots fired ... gun on the ground ... and now a fu_king sunroof lever and none of yesterday's reports are true? And WTF is with no autopsy? Good luck with that if YOU get shot in a criminal act where there's also an explosion. Oh, what primo allies we have in TehWarOnTurrur

Those who empower Chimpy and Darth have their blood-soaked paws in this somewhere, no doubt.
--


May those who so callously propagate fear and death reap the whirlwind.


ShareThis