World News: Apr 15, 2011

Friday, April 15, 2011

A big war (long planned) is on the horizon as the forces of dajjal will attempt to invade Pakistan from both sides, and it would be a brutal war, but the end is also known, and that will be the begining of the Mahdi a.s. army that will conquer the region and would remove every invading/oppressing forces upto Jereseleum. Be prepared for the big events that are on the horizon and the best preparation is to change our lives in the way of the prophet pbuh, garbage all divisions and political bandits, and unite the nation into one ummah...

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: PakNationalists Group <paknationalists@gmail.com>
To: PakNationalists <PakNationalists@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 4:12:20 PM
Subject: PakNationalists - ISI & CIA: Pakistan Eyes New Terms Of Cooperation With US In Afghanistan

Pakistan Eyes New Terms Of Cooperation With US In Afghanistan

The Pakistani side is trying to play its cards in a smart way to renegotiate terms without giving this relationship a huge shock

Click Here To Listen To The Radio Interview

THE VOICE OF RUSSIA | Wednesday | 13 April 2011 | Project Pakistan 21

WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM

Interview with Ahmed Quraishi, senior research fellow at an independent Pakistani think-tank Project For Pakistan In 21^st Century

See interview on RUVR's website

[TRANSCRIPT]

AQ: I think, what we're seeing for the first time since 9/11 is that Pakistan is trying to renegotiate the terms of cooperation, and that is exactly what we've seen happening. Of course, this would be understandably very alarming for the US government and for CIA, because that would mean a change on the ground and a change in the way they've been operating in this region for the past 9 years. So this is a big deal. I'm sure you know that the Pakistan government, the previous one, the current one, have been under tremendous pressure from parts of the public opinion to renegotiate the terms. A lot of Pakistanis believe that the concessions that former President Pervez Musharraf gave the Americans were detrimental in some major ways to Pakistani interests and they were very favorable to American interests, and so there was no balance. And now we see despite the grave imbalance in the Pakistani-American relationship, the Pakistani side trying to play its cards in a smart way to renegotiate those terms without giving this relationship a huge shock. So it's understandable, when we see this kind of reports, the one in the New York Times for example, to see some of the US government officials describing the current relationship as being close to a near collapse. But from the Pakistani side the objective is very clear; I don't think anyone really wants it to collapse, but they are certainly bargaining very hard to renegotiate the terms of cooperation.

The New York Time maintains that the reason for the present deterioration of relations between the United States and Pakistan is the situation around the CIA agent Davis. Perhaps, they are oversimplifying the situation?

There is no doubt about that. Imagine that for the past 9 years the ISI has been cooperating with the CIA and all of a sudden ISI discovers, that the CIA is maintaining a network of informers, of intelligence operatives inside Pakistan without the knowledge of ISI. Of course all spy agencies do this, everybody does it, but because of the close nature of cooperation between ISI and CIA for the past 9 years, what was disturbing this time is that Mr. Davis, and I will not go into details, that he was in contact with some of the terrorist groups that were killing Pakistani civilians. And there are some material evidences and some of the debriefings that were done with him before he was handed over to the Americans, indicated, that he was in touch with the wrong kind of people without informing the Pakistani authorities. Obviously, that was a breakdown in communication and a breakdown in trust between ISI and CIA. Of course, there is a whole list of issues also in the background that unfortunately are not coming up in the media very clearly. For example, Pakistanis have certain grievances with regard to CIA that go beyond just the drone attacks. There is much more, there is a question of the attacks that some of the terrorists and separatists who are conducting terror activities in South-Western Pakistan, in the province of Balochistan, have a very good safe haven in an American-controlled Afghanistan. Pakistanis are asking, why is it that a territory, which is under control of the United States, has become a safe haven for terrorists, who are waging an insurgency inside Pakistan. This is a bone of contention; it also gives rise to certain theories. Is it possible that there are some rogue elements within the CIA who are sort of punishing the ISI and Pakistani military for not cooperating in Afghanistan? There are other questions also. Some of the members of the so-called Pakistani Taliban, who were evicted by the Pakistani military from Swat in military operations, also took refuge in Afghanistan. The question that is raised here is how they managed to cross over into Afghanistan and find safe haven there? Where are NATO forces? Where are American forces? Where is the Afghan national army? And Pakistan is asked to control the movements of Afghan Taliban, who come into Pakistan, then why is it that we don't receive a reciprocal cooperation from the other side, from the international forces on the Afghan side? So these are really major issues that go much beyond just a question of Raymond Davis, just the question of the Americans running a parallel intelligence network inside Pakistan without informing the ISI and also go beyond the fact that there are drone attacks and all. The last drone attack, resulted in the murder of 40 innocent civilians, was a clear case of somebody somewhere in the CIA in Afghanistan conducting that particular attack that appeared to be more the sort of revenge than anything else; there was no intelligence of any Al-Qaeda operatives or high-value targets there. It just seemed very inexplicable, that the CIA would attack a gathering of civilians that would backfire on the Pakistani government and would increase the insurgency in Pakistan's tribal belt.

What you are telling me coincides whit what President Zardari said yesterday. He said that the war in Afghanistan was destabilizing Pakistan and seriously undermining efforts to restore democratic institutions and economic prosperity. But he also added, that more and more people now start to think, that there is no military solution in Afghanistan. But what is the American stand?

The Americans slowly and gradually by the force of ground realities will have to come around this fact. Already there is a huge debate in Washington on this, and the reason there is this debate is because the ground realities have proven the theory that the Pakistan president has explained. And it is clear now, that Afghanistan is a mess. Some analysts compared the talk about expanding NATO's mission in Libya to the situation in Afghanistan where the NATO mission is a complete failure; in 9 years they have a country, which is not under their complete control and it's a complete mess. So it is very clear, that there is no solution to Afghanistan for the time being except a political one, and I think, that there is quite bit of a progress being made on that front.

What is Pakistan planning to do in this situation?

The Pakistani strategy is pushing toward a political reconciliation in Afghanistan. Pakistan is trying to show its good intention. One sign of that came last week, when Pakistan announced that it would not object if India participated in some of reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan, which is a huge change in the Pakistani position. Pakistan basically wants to say, that we have no bad intentions towards Afghanistan, we are willing to cooperate with all the parties concerned and our foremost priority is stability in Afghanistan, and for that we have no problem if even India joins the efforts. So for the first time India would also join the efforts that Turkey is spearheading regarding recompilation inside Afghanistan, and India would be participating in these meetings, which would take place in the next few days. So this is a major change in the Pakistani position. Pakistan also wants to show these skeptical elements in the Washington establishment that we are willing to cooperate, and if you withdraw troops, if you get out of Afghanistan and begin a withdrawal, this would not mean necessarily a return to the situation that we saw in Afghanistan back in the 1990s, when different parts of Afghanistan were under the control of different factions; that should not really happen. And all the theories about Pakistan waiting out for the American withdrawal so it could restart its great game in Afghanistan and start playing the same old game through proxy, these are not true. The biggest sign that Pakistan is giving, is that we have never been on the same page with India, what regards to Afghanistan, but we are more than happy to cooperate. Pakistani diplomacy has also opened new avenues for cooperation with Russia as well. Pakistani diplomats now seem to be increasingly hopeful, that the Russians will also have a role to play to stabilize Afghanistan. So it is now a collective game, and hopefully this would reduce some of the mutual suspicions, that various players have had about each other with the regards to Afghanistan.

Is it going to be a part of the agenda of Mr Zardari's visit to Turkey these days?

Actually the unsaid words about this visit have to do with the reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan. Turkey is playing a major role: over the past few months consensus developed between various players that we need to find a country that can act as a neutral venue [for talks] that everybody could trust. For example, there was also some talk about the fact, that the Afghan Taliban also needed a place where they could freely conduct talks with the Afghan government representatives and others. And it emerged that Turkey came up as a good venue for all of this. And probably we are going to see in the next few days the opening of a representation office in Turkey where the negotiators from the Afghan Taliban could be based there. So Turkey has emerged as a neutral venue for reconciliation talks in Afghanistan, and all of us will see increase the activity in Turkey with regards to Afghanistan in the next few days. And the purpose of the visit of the Pakistan president to Turkey basically is all about this point – reconciliation in Afghanistan.

To find out more on the issue, read or listen to our Burning Point program from April 12, 2011 in Radio section.

Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium

without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

YOUR comment IS IMPORTANT

Do NOT underestimate the power of your comment

Please click here to comment at PakNationalists.com or read what others have said about this story.

Subscribe to our PakNationalists Group to receive regular updates. Join this group using your

gmail account, or email us at PakNationalists@gmail.com to add you to the mailing list.

--
PakNationalists is a meeting point of Pakistani nationalists. We come from all backgrounds. We are proud of the great history of all Pakistanis, a people extracted from the great cultures of the Turks, Persians, Arabs and Aryans. And we are proud of modern Pakistan, a nation that rose against all odds. We believe in the oneness of the Pakistani nation and that it is destined to play its role in these challenging and interesting times. This pride affects how we approach Pakistan's national and international policy issues.

PakNationalists is associated with PakNationalists.com

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "PakNationalists" group.

To post to this group, send email to paknationalists@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
paknationalists+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/paknationalists?hl=en

JP Judiciary & Military Arrests President, His Sons

Will the PPP expel zardari/Gilani/rahman malik & co. this way, or the muslim league do the same to nawaz & co?

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: PakNationalists Group <paknationalists@gmail.com>
To: PakNationalists <PakNationalists@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, April 13, 2011 6:45:06 PM
Subject: PakNationalists - Judiciary & Military Arrests President, His Sons

EXCLUSIVE: When Mubarak Collapsed In Front Of Investigators

· Judiciary and Military Arrest The President; Break New Ground

· Mubarak's Sons And Top Cabinet Members In Jail For Amassing Illegal Wealth

· Alaa and Jamaal In The Same Jail Where Opponents Of Their Father Were Tortured

· Suzanne Thabet, Mubarak's Wife Known For Corruption And Ruthlessness, Is Being Interrogated

· Top Names Of Egyptian Elite In The Same Jail As Mubarak Sons

SPECIAL REPORT | Thursday | 14 April 2011

WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM

DUBAI, UAE—Egypt's judiciary and military-backed government broke new ground when Alaa and Jamal, sons of ousted president Hosni Mubarak, were jailed yesterday in Cairo, handcuffed and wearing standard prison jumpsuits. This was the first sign of a major cleanup at the top of Egypt's power elite.

Egyptians have long feared the Tora prison on the outskirts of Cairo as a symbol of Mubarak's power and the place where his political opponents were tortured.

But yesterday, Mubarak's own sons, until recently very powerful and feared, were led to Tora. Their father was to join them in jail but instead he is under bed arrest at a military hospital where investigators remanded him for 15 days to investigate his role in ordering the clampdown on Egyptian protesters that resulted in the murder of hundreds.

Here, PakNationalists.com publishes nuggets of exclusive details about how the family of the former president received the news of their arrest along with key figures in the Mubarak regime, like the former prime minister and the former parliament speaker.

Most of these details mentioned here took place in Sharm el Sheikh early morning on Tuesday. The information is gleaned from eyewitness accounts in Cairo and Sharm el-Sheikh,

HOW MUBARAK RECEIVED THE NEWS

Mubarak heard of the order by the prosecutor general for his arrest along with his sons, but it wasn't until he saw the investigators arriving at his Sharm el Sheikh residence that he finally collapsed. The standby medical team got alarmed at Mubarak's increased heartbeats and rising blood pressure and he was immediately taken to the nearby Sharm el Sheikh international hospital.

Suzanne Mubarak, his wife and once one of the most powerful women in the regime, began crying loud as soon as her husband fell to the ground. The security detail and the investigators dealt humanely with the situation, helping the former president to a sofa. Within a few minutes, a black limousine was rushing him to the hospital. Once his condition stabilized, Mubarak was transferred to suite number 309 so that the interrogation could begin.

Egyptian police and military was quick to seal all entry points to Mubarak's room fearing that around 400 protesters gathered outside the hospital might try to storm the building and hurt the former president. As doctors tended to Mubarak, the screams of the protesters outside could be clearly heard as they shouted demanding that Mubarak be expelled from the hospital and the city itself.

According to eyewitnesses, Mubarak could clearly hear the shouting and at one point his eyes were overwhelmed with tears as his wife Suzanne continued to pat him on his shoulders. The scene was too charged even for the medical team that has been on the standby for the 80-year-old former president. Several attendants and team members were seen crying.

As soon as the senior doctor at the hospital testified that Mubarak's condition was normal, the investigators from the prosecutor-general's office occupied the seats around the former president's bed to begin the probe into his role in killing protesters. Another team waited in Cairo to ask the former president questions about his wealth and a long list of corruption charges.

Despite being in near collapse, Mubarak treated the investigators well and asked for refreshments. At the same time, another group of investigators led his sons Alaa and Jamaal to another room where they faced a tough time for several hours, dodging questions about their huge wealth. After the meeting, the two were served orders by the prosecutor-general putting them under arrest for 15 days in jail pending the probe. Police arrested Alaa and Jamaal and led them away. Their mother, who was yet to be interrogated, came running to them and shouted, "No, No, this can't be …' when told her sons were under arrest.

According to eyewitness accounts, Mubarak tried to convince the interrogators to convert the arrest orders of his sons into house arrest. But the interrogators insisted they had specific orders to arrest Alaa Mubarak and Jamal Mubarak and bring them to Cairo handcuffed. This was probably one of the most difficult moments for him.

ALAA AND JAMAAL IN JAIL

The order of the prosecutor-general to arrest former president Hosni Mubarak for 15 days is a landmark event in the popular uprising in Egypt, but it was the arrest of his two sons and the way they were brought from Sharm el Sheikh to the Tora jail in Cairo that captured the imaginations of the Egyptians.

Alaa and Jamaal and their wives and inlaws, along with their mother Suzanne Thabet, were the most corrupt figures of Hosni Mubarak's government, followed by his key lieutenants in government, all the way down to the parliament speaker and key leaders of the ruling party.

Alaa and Jamaal were known to pocket money from wealthy foreign investors in exchange for government investment concessions. Their mother headed a government-backed NGO and was known to have skimmed hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign aid that the NGO received. She was especially famous for crude way of treating the staff of the presidential palace.

Mubarak was grooming one of his sons to succeed him in power. So imagine the surprise of the Egyptian people to see Alaa and Jamaal in handcuffs and jumpsuits being led to the Tora prison. No one has captured this image more perfectly than Jack Shenker of the Guardian newspaper.

He wrote describing the scene:

"The barbed wire fences and forbidding high walls became a horrifyingly familiar sight to those who dared speak out over the past three decades; for many of the thousands who passed through Cairo's Tora prison complex and were tortured within it, this notorious jail was the ultimate symbol of Hosni Mubarak's Egypt.

On Wednesday, as it has done so many times before, Tora received two more prisoners accused of crimes against the state. Their names were Gamal and Alaa Mubarak, sons of the ousted president, and they arrived in the early hours, handcuffed and clad in standard-issue white jumpsuits."

A joke making the rounds in Cairo these days is that former president Mubarak will soon be in a position to hold the first meeting of his ousted cabinet in the Tora prison because of the large number of figures from his regime behind bars, including the former prime minister, the former parliament speaker, among others.

EXPELLED FROM PARTY

The National Party, which ruled Egypt for three decades under Mubarak, took a major step yesterday by formally expelling the former president, his two sons, and 22 other senior leaders from the party on permanent basis. All of the 22, including the president and his sons, are under arrest for corruption.

The Egyptian judiciary and the military-led interim government appeared reluctant in the past weeks in putting Mubarak on trial. But thanks to the perseverance of Egypt's pro-reform movement, and especially the younger generation of Egyptians, Mubarak and his entire family is under arrest for corruption and murder.

Another remarkable thing the Egyptian people have done is to support the extra-constitutional intervention by the judiciary and the military to reform the Constitution to make it more democratic and suited to Egypt's political environment before holding any elections.

Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium

without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

YOUR comment IS IMPORTANT

Do NOT underestimate the power of your comment

Please click here to comment at PakNationalists.com or read what others have said about this story.

Subscribe to our PakNationalists Group to receive regular updates. Join this group using your

gmail account, or email us at PakNationalists@gmail.com to add you to the mailing list.

JP Where Is Pakistani Charge Sheet Against CIA?

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: PakNationalists Group <paknationalists@gmail.com>
To: PakNationalists <PakNationalists@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, April 14, 2011 8:13:22 PM
Subject: PakNationalists - Where Is Pakistani Charge Sheet Against CIA?

Where Is The Pakistani Charge Sheet Against CIA?

Pakistan has a strong case against CIA but is inexplicably quiet, possibly to avert a collapse in relations that is already here.

AHMED QURAISHI | Friday | 15 April 2011

WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—If there ever was a diplomatic equivalent of a kick-in-the-ass, this was it: a drone attack inside Pakistan hours after ISI chief visited Washington to ask his CIA counterpart to cease such attacks.

Before this there was the diplomatic equivalent of a slap in the face three weeks earlier, when a drone attack followed the release of CIA mercenary Raymond Davis.

Despite the kick and the slap, Pakistani responses continue to be cautious and measured. Pakistani officials providing background briefings to US reporters stationed in Islamabad continue to play safe, refusing to say if Pakistan decisively wants an end to CIA-run drone attacks. On Tuesday, a Pakistani foreign office spokesperson sought to soften the impact of a Pakistani protest to the US ambassador on the latest drone attack. Now the foreign office is saying that the US ambassador was not summoned to the foreign office to receive a demarche but was in the building for other business when the matter came up.

This doesn't mean that Pakistani military officials are not capable of bold action. To his credit, army chief Gen. Kayani publicly contradicted American claims on targeting 'militants' in the drone attack on 17 March. He sympathized 'with the people of Waziristan,' insisting in an official statement that the 'security of the people of Pakistan, in any case, stands above all.'

Also, the ISI chief did not hesitate to cut short his Washington visit, dropping an expected meeting with US defense secretary Robert Gates, after he was apparently told that CIA drones and some of the covert activities in Pakistan will continue.

But suspicions are growing that these reactions are for public consumption without any change in Pakistan's role in America's Afghan war. And chances are that President Zardari's government will not fully support such a move.

SILENCE ON CIA'S TERROR RECORD

What Pakistan refuses to do until now is to bell the cat. There is a long list of evidences that point to rogue CIA operations in Afghanistan and links to exporting terrorism to Pakistan.

The CIA contingent in Afghanistan helped groom and support insurgencies and terrorism in Pakistan. It was one way of nudging the Pakistani army into full cooperation in America's war. The idea was to create Islamic groups that attack and kill enough Pakistanis to build domestic pressure to act against all groups, including the Pakistan-friendly Afghan Taliban and the pro-Kashmir groups.

The CIA also punished Pakistan by providing a safe haven in Afghanistan to terrorists claiming to fight in the name of Balochistan, the strategic southwestern province. The official American role in protecting terrorist leader Brahamdagh Bugti is known to Pakistani officials, backed by evidence.

The CIA brought the Indian intelligence service to Afghanistan to help deal with Pakistan.

The Pakistani Taliban, responsible for killing thousands of ordinary Pakistanis in public bombings, was launched by a Pakistani tribesman recruited by CIA and the Indian spy service while in US custody for two years. He was an unknown foot soldier for the Afghan Taliban and was arrested in 2001. But after spending two years with the Americans, he returned to Pakistan as the commander of a new group called Pakistani Taliban, with enough money and weapons to raise a small army. He was released from American custody but was not handed over to Pakistan. His first act of jihad after crossing into Pakistan and forming the so-called Pakistani Taliban was to kidnap and kill Chinese engineers. The Pakistani Taliban's supplies continue to come from Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban deny any link to this group.

The idea behind Pakistani Taliban was simple: If Pakistan can use religious proxies in Afghanistan and Kashmir, so can others. Trained killers in the Pakistani Taliban introduced suicide bombings into Pakistan sometime in 2006, mostly targeting Pakistani cities. Young Pakistani boys were recruited and told they were being prepared for suicide attacks against American soldiers but were sent to kill Pakistani civilians in public places.

In July 2008, in a meeting in Rawalpindi during a secret visit by Admiral Mike Mullen and CIA deputy director Stephen Kappes, senior Pakistani military officers accused CIA of protecting terrorist leaders of the Pakistani Taliban.

Again, in November 2009, the incumbent ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha confronted his CIA counterpart Leon E. Panetta with several pieces of evidence that showed links between CIA and anti-Pakistan terrorists. A detailed report published by a Pakistani newspaper provided a glimpse into that meeting. Here is an excerpt:

"It was in this background that after putting up with so much for so long, the prime intelligence agency of the country ultimately confronted the CIA Director Leon E. Panetta with some highly classified and irrefutable evidence. Panetta was startled when Director-General ISI, General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, a no-nonsense General, placed the facts before him in Islamabad on November 20, 2009."

As recently as yesterday, retired Vice Admiral Taj Khattak has accused the US military of turning an Afghan province into a base for Pakistani Taliban terrorists to plan and launch attacks inside Pakistan.

[For more reports on CIA's involvement in terrorism in Pakistan, click here, here, here, here, here, here and here.]

One more evidence of CIA's breach of Pakistani interests came on the last day of 2009, when a Jordanian agent working for CIA blew himself up inside a spy office in Khost across the border from Pakistan. Despite wide media coverage of the incident, a key point that many missed was how CIA had dragged spy services from several countries to join its illegal operations inside Pakistan. Thanks to CIA, Afghanistan today is an intelligence blackhole, used by spy services from several countries for multiple strategic purposes.

Pakistan has a solid case against CIA but it continues to prefer to lose the perceptions war in the hope of averting a collapse in relations that is here anyway.

Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium

without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

YOUR comment IS IMPORTANT

Do NOT underestimate the power of your comment

Please click here to comment at PakNationalists.com or read what others have said about this story.

Subscribe to our PakNationalists Group to receive regular updates. Join this group using your

gmail account, or email us at PakNationalists@gmail.com to add you to the mailing list.

JP امریکی جنگی جرائم ۔ڈرون حملے

اسلا م وعلیکم
میں نے یہ کالم ڈرون حملے کے حوالے سے لکھا ہے امید ہے پسند آئے گا ۔ شکریہ

عینی نیا زی

امریکی جنگی جرائم ۔ڈرون حملے

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197

Re: War is the Biggest Power Grab of All

First, Israel is an important ally, they are the only bastion in
the
Middle East that resembles Western Civilization.
----
so, you're saying that they are an important ally because they
resemble Western Civ?
Surely there is a reason other than appearance.

Second, right there neck-in-neck with the aid that we give to Israel,
is
Egypt.
----
I would stop funding to Egypt on the same grounds ... because we can't
afford it and because it is unnecessary.

America first ... always and forever

On Apr 15, 5:24 am, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I only got past the first paragraph of this missive, before I realized that
> this is but one more of PlainOl's "Patriot/Militia/TaxProtest/The
> Highwaymen/TheIlluminatiAreComingAfterUsAlongWithTheTriLateralistsBilderber gs"
> kind of post.
>
> First, Israel is an important ally, they are the only bastion in the
> Middle East that resembles Western Civilization. Whether we like it, or we
> don't like it, oil is an important commodity to the world, and the region
> is unstable, with, or without Israel.
>
> Second, right there neck-in-neck with the aid that we give to Israel, is
> Egypt. Allies in and of themself. At least this week. The last time I
> looked, Egypt wasn't all that Jewish.
>
> So, the point being? Maybe it has to do with logistics and locale, and not
> so much Judaism. I think just as important, it has been our Nation's
> policy since 1947, that Israel is going to be a Nation-State, and will
> exist. I don't necessarily have a problem with this decision, but I do have
> a problem in that we didn't enfoce UN Resolution 242 (and others) that
> mandated there would be a separate, equal Palestine. Today, Israel totally
> rejects this notion, and until such time as Israel starts skipping our rope,
> then all foreign aid should be cut off.
>
> I do agree with the writer in one aspect. I am sick and tired of anyone who
> questions Israel's foreign policy, or our foreign policy toward Israel, as
> being somehow Anti-Semitic. There are a number of questions regarding why
> we have supported Israel's foreign policy, when it was blatantly in
> violation of UN Resolutions, that should be asked.
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:29 PM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> > foreign-policy makers have become Washington's leading con men. Even
> > though Whiz Kids and Dream Teams have dragged America into one debacle
> > after another
> > ----
> > American foreign policy since the end of the cold war has been focused
> > primarily on the Middle East and to an alarming extent on the defense
> > and promotion of Israel. Why has Israel become so central to our
> > foreign policy and what advantages does the United States gain from
> > the relationship?
> > Israel is not an important trading partner for the United States, in
> > 20th place, behind Venezuela and Thailand. Israel has no significant
> > natural resources, nor is Israel an important defense ally. None of
> > its neighbors pose any significant threat to the United States or
> > American interests. There is not an important Israeli American
> > population. If we equate American Jews as somehow "Israeli" because
> > of the fact that Israel is a Jewish state, than we are still only
> > talking about a population of 6,444,000 approx. (2007) 1.7% – 2.2% of
> > the US population. This is less than the number of Polish Americans,
> > approximately 10,000,000 people and well below the number of Irish
> > Americans, over 30,000,000.
> > Yet Ireland never received anywhere near the attention that Israel has
> > in the media, in political debates, in foreign aid or in foreign
> > policy efforts, even when a full blown civil war was occurring in
> > Ulster.
> > The attention Israel receives in the United States is completely
> > disproportionate to its strategic, commercial, or political
> > importance. For example, in reference to the 2008 presidential
> > elections, Shmuel Rosner at Slate wrote,
> > "in the vice-presidential debate, Israel's name was mentioned 17
> > times. China was mentioned twice, Europe just once. Russia didn't come
> > up at all. Nor Britain, France, or Germany. The only two countries to
> > get more attention were Iraq and Afghanistan—the countries in which
> > U.S. forces are fighting wars…. A week earlier, in the first McCain-
> > Obama debate, Israel was mentioned seven times, fewer than Russia but
> > still more than China or Japan or any country in Europe, Latin
> > America, or Africa."
> > In regards to American foreign aid, the amounts are striking.
> > According to John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt,
> > "Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a
> > level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been
> > the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military
> > assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since
> > World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004
> > dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each
> > year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about
> > $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking
> > since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita
> > income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain."
> > It's fascinating to compare American foreign policy in Mexico, a
> > country of over 100,000 million people (Israel's population is around
> > 7.5 million) and a very important trading partner with the US. Issues
> > like immigration and drug trafficking with Mexico have palpable daily
> > effects on the lives of Americans, yet Mexico receives less the 2% of
> > the foreign aid that Israel gets, less than 40 million dollars
> > compared to Israel's almost 3 billion. And the over 28 million
> > Americans who are of Mexican ancestry? They are apparently, for
> > politicians, much less important than the less than 7 million Jewish
> > Americans.
> > In the sphere of politics the tone and attitude of US politicians
> > sounds as if their careers depend on how they speak of Israel. Joe
> > Biden during the Vice Presidential debate,
> > "Gwen, no one in the United States Senate has been a better friend to
> > Israel than Joe Biden. I would have never, ever joined this ticket
> > were I not absolutely sure Barack Obama shared my passion."
> > And Sarah Palin,
> > "But I'm so encouraged to know that we both love Israel, and I think
> > that is a good thing to get to agree on, Sen. Biden. I respect your
> > position on that."
> > And President Obama this summer said, according to the New York Times,
> > "that he is committed to Israel's security but does not believe it is
> > essential for him to avoid all disagreement with the Jewish state."
> > This type of language can only be considered pandering. Why are they
> > pandering to Israel? During the 2008 presidential election, John
> > McCain said he would not sit down with the Spanish government because
> > of the way they pulled their troops out of Iraq. It caused a minor
> > stir, but never became an issue of any importance. Do you think
> > either Obama or McCain could have been elected if either had said that
> > they would not sit down with Israeli leaders due to continued new
> > settlements in the West Bank?
> > Israel is considered to be a nuclear power. Few if any deny that
> > Israel has nuclear weapons, as well as other weapons of mass
> > destruction. Why does Israel receive no pressure at all from the
> > United States to become a non-nuclear power? Would this not be an
> > excellent bargaining chip with Iran? Iran is a country of over 70,000
> > million people with a tremendous history and culture, yet they are not
> > allowed to have nuclear weapons, but Israel is? It is easy to
> > understand the Iranian objection to this double standard. It's very
> > unfortunate that Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, continues to
> > spew ridiculous, anti-Semitic diatribes that completely distract the
> > attention of the world from the real issues of the Middle East and
> > reduce his country's credibility. Again, Mearshimeimer and Walt
> > write,
> > "Washington also provides Israel with consistent diplomatic support.
> > Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical
> > of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other
> > Security Council members. It blocks the efforts of Arab states to put
> > Israel's nuclear arsenal on the IAEA's agenda."
> > Why is it impossible to have a sensible, open debate in the United
> > States regarding our relationship to Israel? The clearest example of
> > why it is not possible occurred in 2006 when John Mearsheimer of the
> > University of Chicago and Stephen Walt of Harvard published a white
> > paper about the power of AIPCAC, the principal Israeli lobby in the
> > US. The ensuing debate was not centered on the issues of the white
> > paper, quite the contrary; both academics were accused of everything
> > from lack of professionalism to anti-Semitism. The White Paper made
> > very clear arguments about the power of AIPAC and their silencing of
> > Israel's critics. Mearsheimer and Walt pulled no punches,
> > "For the past several decades, and especially since the Six-Day War in
> > 1967, the centrepiece of US Middle Eastern policy has been its
> > relationship with Israel. The combination of unwavering support for
> > Israel and the related effort to spread 'democracy' throughout the
> > region has inflamed Arab and Islamic opinion and jeopardised not only
> > US security but that of much of the rest of the world. This situation
> > has no equal in American political history. Why has the US been
> > willing to set aside its own security and that of many of its allies
> > in order to advance the interests of another state?"
> > The authors received a drubbing and were quickly silenced. Alan
> > Derschowitz as well as Eliot Cohen of John Hopkins both accused
> > Mearsheimer and Walt of anti-Semitism and bigotry.
> > When Jimmy Carter came out with his book about the Israeli-Palestinian
> > question, Palestine Peace Not Apartheid, the debate again became about
> > him, not the plight of the Palestinians.
> > Increasingly, the war in Iraq is being attributed to the Neo-
> > Conservative wing of the Republican Party that had a very influential
> > role in the Bush administration. For most of the world this has been
> > obvious, but in the US it has been a taboo topic. Michael Kinsley is
> > quoted as saying "the connection between the invasion of Iraq and
> > Israeli interests had become 'the proverbial elephant in the room.
> > Everybody sees it, no one mentions it.'" The Neo-Cons had for
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

World News

Friday, April 15, 2011

JP Updated information about Target Killers....?

JP Baber Wali Target Killer findout.....

JP See what Pakistani Generation is doing in other countries...?

JP ISI & CIA: Pakistan Eyes New Terms Of Cooperation With US In Afghanistan

JP Judiciary & Military Arrests President, His Sons

JP Where Is Pakistani Charge Sheet Against CIA?

JP امریکی جنگی جرائم ۔ڈرون حملے

Re: War is the Biggest Power Grab of All