Are the Iranian Election Protests Another US Orchestrated ‘Color Revolution’?

By Paul Craig Roberts

June 20, 2009 “Information Clearing House”

– -A number of commentators have expressed their idealistic belief in the purity of Mousavi, Montazeri, and the westernized youth of Terhan. The CIA destabilization plan, announced two years ago (see below) has somehow not contaminated unfolding events.

The claim is made that Ahmadinejad stole the election, because the outcome was declared too soon after the polls closed for all the votes to have been counted. However, Mousavi declared his victory several hours before the polls closed. This is classic CIA destabilization designed to discredit a contrary outcome. It forces an early declaration of the vote. The longer the time interval between the preemptive declaration of victory and the announcement of the vote tally, the longer Mousavi has to create the impression that the authorities are using the time to fix the vote. It is amazing that people don’t see through this trick.

As for the grand ayatollah Montazeri’s charge that the election was stolen, he was the initial choice to succeed Khomeini, but lost out to the current Supreme Leader. He sees in the protests an opportunity to settle the score with Khamenei. Montazeri has the incentive to challenge the election whether or not he is being manipulated by the CIA, which has a successful history of manipulating disgruntled politicians.

There is a power struggle among the ayatollahs. Many are aligned against Ahmadinejad because he accuses them of corruption, thus playing to the Iranian countryside where Iranians believe the ayatollahs’ lifestyles indicate an excess of power and money. In my opinion, Ahmadinejad’s attack on the ayatollahs is opportunistic. However, it does make it odd for his American detractors to say he is a conservative reactionary lined up with the ayatollahs.

Commentators are “explaining” the Iran elections based on their own illusions, delusions, emotions, and vested interests. Whether or not the poll results predicting Ahmadinejad’s win are sound, there is, so far, no evidence beyond surmise that the election was stolen. However, there are credible reports that the CIA has been working for two years to destabilize the Iranian government.

On May 23, 2007, Brian Ross and Richard Esposito reported on ABC News: “The CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert “black” operation to destabilize the Iranian government, current and former officials in the intelligence community tell ABC News.”

On May 27, 2007, the London Telegraph independently reported: “Mr. Bush has signed an official document endorsing CIA plans for a propaganda and disinformation campaign intended to destabilize, and eventually topple, the theocratic rule of the mullahs.”

A few days previously, the Telegraph reported on May 16, 2007, that Bush administration neocon warmonger John Bolton told the Telegraph that a US military attack on Iran would “be a ‘last option’ after economic sanctions and attempts to foment a popular revolution had failed.”

On June 29, 2008, Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker: “Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership.”

The protests in Tehran no doubt have many sincere participants. The protests also have the hallmarks of the CIA orchestrated protests in Georgia and Ukraine.
It requires total blindness not to see this.

Daniel McAdams has made some telling points. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/027782.html  For example, neoconservative Kenneth Timmerman wrote the day before the election that “there’s talk of a ‘green revolution’ in Tehran.” How would Timmerman know that unless it was an orchestrated plan? Why would there be a ‘green revolution’ prepared prior to the vote, especially if Mousavi and his supporters were as confident of victory as they claim? This looks like definite evidence that the US is involved in the election protests.

Timmerman goes on to write that “the National Endowment for Democracy has spent millions of dollars promoting ‘color’ revolutions . . . Some of that money appears to have made it into the hands of pro-Mousavi groups, who have ties to non-governmental organizations outside Iran that the National Endowment for Democracy funds.” Timmerman’s own neocon Foundation for Democracy is “a private, non-profit organization established in 1995 with grants from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), to promote democracy and internationally-recognized standards of human rights in Iran.”

Gaza bonanza

Children in Gaza - an open air concentration camp

Gaza bonanza

By Yotam Feldman and Uri Blau ( http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1092196.html )

Every week, about 10 officers from the Israel Defense Force’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT?) unit convene in the white Templer building in the Kirya, the Defense Ministry compound in Tel Aviv, to decide which food products will appear on the tables of the 1.5 million inhabitants of the Gaza Strip. Among those taking part in the discussion are Colonel Moshe Levi, head of the Gaza District Coordination Office (DCO), Colonel Alex Rosenzweig, head of the civil division of COGAT and Colonel Doron Segal, head of the economics division. These officers decided, for example, that persimmons, bananas and apples were vital items for basic sustenance and thus permitted into the Gaza Strip, while apricots, plums, grapes and avocados were impermissible luxuries. Over the past year, these officers were responsible for prohibiting the entry into the Gaza Strip of tinned meat, tomato paste, clothing, shoes and notebooks. All these items are sitting in the giant storerooms rented by Israeli suppliers near the Kerem Shalom crossing, awaiting a change in policy. The policy is not fixed, but continually subject to change, explains a COGAT official. Thus, about two months ago, the COGAT officials allowed pumpkins and carrots into Gaza, reversing a ban that had been in place for many months. The entry of “delicacies” such as cherries, kiwi, green almonds, pomegranates and chocolate is expressly prohibited. As is halvah, too, most of the time. Sources involved in COGAT’s work say that those at the highest levels, including acting coordinator Amos Gilad, monitor the food brought into Gaza on a daily basis and personally approve the entry of any kind of fruit, vegetable or processed food product requested by the Palestinians. At one of the unit’s meetings, Colonel Oded Iterman, a COGAT officer, explained the policy as follows: “We don’t want Gilad Shalit’s captors to be munching Bamba [a popular Israeli snack food] right over his head.” The “Red Lines” document explains: “In order to make basic living in Gaza possible, the deputy defense minister approved the entry into the Gaza Strip of 106 trucks with humanitarian products, 77 of which are basic food products. The entry of wheat and animal feed was also permitted via the aggregates conveyor belt outside the Karni terminal.” Advertisement   After four pages filled with detailed charts of the number of grams and calories of every type of food to be permitted for consumption by Gaza residents (broken down by gender and age), comes this recommendation: “It is necessary to deal with the international community and the Palestinian Health Ministry to provide nutritional supplements (only some of the flour in Gaza is enriched) and to provide education about proper nutrition.” Printed in large letters at the end of the document is this admonition: “The stability of the humanitarian effort is critical for the prevention of the development of malnutrition.” In fact, the number of trucks entering the Gaza Strip is very close to the absolute minimum required for basic sustenance, as determined by the IDF itself. Data compiled by UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, shows that while the minimum number of trucks per day set by the IDF is 106, in May, 117 trucks passed through the Kerem Shalom terminal; in April the number was 113 and, before the start of Operation Cast Lead in December 2008, just 37. These quantities allow a very slim margin for error or mishaps. Moreover, COGAT’s analysis is statistically accurate only on condition that there is an equal division of the minimum supplies that are allowed in. “This analysis does not take distribution in the field into consideration,” says the “Red Lines” document. A COGAT official says that he assumes that food distribution within Gaza is not equal. If some are receiving more, others are necessarily receiving less than the required minimum. So it is hard to reconcile this information with the claims of the defense minister and COGAT officers that there is no real food shortage in Gaza. COGAT officers are in regular contact with international organizations, listen to their complaints and examine their requests to bring in various goods, in both official and unofficial meetings. For example, Amos Gilad has dinner from time to time with an official from the UNRWA delegation in Israel. The Israeli officers repeat the following phrase in their meetings with organization officials: “No prosperity, no development, no humanitarian crisis.” A senior COGAT officer explains to Haaretz that it’s not a siege policy, but rather the restriction of entry of luxury products. The decision as to which products qualify as “luxury” changes from week to week, and sometimes from day to day. Some of these changes are the result of international pressure exerted upon Israel. For example, when he visited Gaza last February, U.S. Senator John Kerry was stunned to discover that Israel was not allowing Palestinians to bring in trucks loaded with pasta. Following American pressure, on March 20 the cabinet decided to permit the unrestricted transfer of food products into Gaza. Incredibly, the COGAT personnel do not see any contradiction between this decision and the serious restrictions that are nevertheless imposed on the entry of various food items. “Let it be clear that the decision was not intended to lift the restrictions that were imposed in the past in relation to the entry of equipment and food into the Gaza Strip, as determined by the cabinet decision of September 19,” said COGAT in response to Gisha: Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, which has demanded that “prohibited” foods be allowed to enter Gaza. Despite the many resources invested by the IDF in coordinating with the Palestinians, since the start of the blockade no list of permitted and prohibited items has been relayed to the Palestinian side. The DCO spokesperson says there is no such list and that the Palestinians “know what they’re allowed to bring in.” But the Palestinians are less satisfied with this situation: Riad Fatouh says that at a meeting three months ago at the Agriculture Ministry in Tel Aviv, attended by al-Sheikh and Mhana from the Palestinian side, he asked DCO chief Moshe Levi for an official document detailing which products the army currently allows to be brought into Gaza. “Even if there are just 10 types of goods, I want to see it in writing,” says Fatouh. According to Fatouh, Levi was visibly angered upon hearing the request, and told him never to make such a request again, to be satisfied with the transfer of information by telephone. When Fatouh asked Levi why, the DCO chief told him: “Any goods that we allow in, or prohibit – you’ll know about it by phone. That’s the way we work.” No one else in the room mentioned it again. “If you go back two years, you see that it was utter foolishness,” says a senior officer who was serving in COGAT when the blockade was imposed. “There was a vague, unclear policy, influenced by the interests of certain groups, by this or that lobby, without any policy that derived from the needs of the population. For example, the fruit growers have a powerful lobby, and this lobby saw to it that on certain days, from 20-25 trucks full of fruit were brought into Gaza. It’s not that it arrived there and was thrown out, but if you were to ask a Gazan who lives there, it’s not exactly what he needs. What happened was that the Israeli interest took precedence over the needs of the populace.” This move was greeted with dismay by many farmers in Israel, who were very pleased with Madar’s performance. At an April 20 meeting in the office of Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai, it was decided that Madar is the one “who will set the agricultural agenda.” Vilnai decided at that same meeting that Madar would be returned to the Erez checkpoint, but a military source explained that security considerations prevent his permanent return there. The spokesperson for the coordinator of activity in the territories would not permit Madar to be interviewed. Avshalom Herzog, a member of Moshav Almagor, is a fruit grower and the proprietor of a large packing house. He says he has connections with 80 percent of the packing houses in Israel that transport goods to Gaza, in part because of his partnership with Khaled Uthman, the largest fruit trader in Gaza. Herzog is an energetic farmer, and frequently writes to the decision-makers – Deputy Defense Minister Vilnai, Agriculture Minister Shalom Simhon and COGAT officers – about bringing goods into Gaza. “Until three or four years ago, in a normal year I transported 30-40 percent of the fruit that went into Gaza,” says Herzog. “Today it’s no more than 10-15 percent, because the market in Gaza is not a real market, but rather a market determined by the Defense Ministry. If the Defense Ministry says only 10 trucks will enter, then it doesn’t matter who works in Gaza – he’ll make money. And then there are wars between people who were never traders and there is bribery and people start to pay huge sums for the transport of fruit – irrational things, and then my share is diminished. I know that’s how it is and there’s not much I can do about it.” Herzog and other farmers have found an attentive audience in Simhon and Vilnai, but they are still not satisfied. “Simhon helps us sometimes,” says Herzog, “but if he wanted to, he could have solved the problems a long time ago. You know what really makes me mad? There was a decision made in a meeting back in April. They came out with a protocol that required the entry of 20 trucks a day, and required that at least three trucks be filled with melons and that an officer from the agriculture staff who was exiled to Julis, in north Israel, be immediately returned to the Erez crossing, where he needed to be for the farmers’ sake. This decision makes it plain as day that the one determining the mix of fruit [to be trucked in] is the director of the fruit growers’ organization together with an officer of the agriculture staff in the Gaza DCO. But it’s ignored. Today it’s permissible to bring in peaches, bananas, apples, dates. Kumquats were permissible until yesterday. There are no plums, no pumpkin, no watermelon and no onion. It’s just impossible to believe.” Summaries of the discussions about entry of food into Gaza show just how deeply the captains of the defense establishment seem to care about the income of Israeli farmers. Hence, in a discussion that took place in the office of Deputy Minister Vilnai, it was decided that every day, 15 trucks filled with agricultural produce would be brought in. “The problem right now is the emphasis on melons and fruit in general,” Agriculture Ministry Director General Yossi Yishai said at the meeting. At the conclusion of the discussion, Vilnai instructed that three trucks with melons be brought into Gaza each week, “So as not to cause a market failure in Israel.” Another document, from the end of April, signed by Vilnai’s public information officer, says: “Israel’s policy at the crossings is set at various times in accordance with a number of considerations … Economic considerations, including the agricultural establishment, are at the basis of the policy considerations.” Meir Yifrah, secretary of the Vegetable Growers Organization, also tries to exert influence on the decisions of COGAT and the Defense Ministry, with occasional success. “Once a month or so, I send a text message to [Agriculture Minister Simhon] Shalom saying the situation in the market is very tough, the growers need to send produce to Gaza, see what you can do with the Defense Ministry, so they’ll bring in what’s needed. It seems odd to me that pumpkin can be defined as a luxury item. It’s sometimes used to feed animals, more than for people. If there are two or three or four growers who want to send stuff in and it’s something they’re short on there (in Gaza), I say they should be able to do that. I tried to pressure the Agriculture Ministry, and in the end we were successful. Last year I had a bad situation with onions. A lot of growers were stuck with their stock. We pressed the Agriculture Ministry and then they increased the onion quota from five to eight trucks at the end of last year.” Are sales to Gaza significant for Israeli farmers? “The farmers’ interest is to find other markets, so we can increase profitability for the grower, by creating demand in Israel and avoiding surpluses.” The Agriculture Ministry claims it also takes care of Palestinian interests: “When it comes to a decision on the kind of produce to be allowed into Gaza, the ministry takes into consideration Palestinian needs, the Israeli growers’ ability to fulfill these needs as well as their own interests, and especially the Israeli consumer, to maintain reasonable prices in the local market. Minister Simhon, as a matter of policy, sees agriculture as a bridge to peace, and in every government in which he served, he has demanded the continuation of trade in farm products with the Palestinians, as well as cooperation in disease control in animals and plants – even in the worst security situations.” COGAT’s “Red Lines” document, which defines the minimum necessary for the sustenance of Gaza residents, also finds that 300 calves a week are needed to feed Gazans – That’s at least 200 fewer than the number brought in when the crossing was open for trade. Nevertheless, in the six months since Cast Lead, Israel has not permitted the entry of any live calves into Gaza, allowing only frozen meat and fish. In the period prior to the war, when Gaza residents were able to obtain permits to import calves, this was limited to calves from Israel, not from other countries as in the past. In recent months, Israeli cattle breeders have been exerting pressure on the Agriculture Minister to get him to allow calves into Gaza. Most impacted by the restrictions on bringing meat into Gaza is Eyal Erlich, a former journalist who 15 years ago made a drastic career switch to become an importer of beef. Each year, until the blockade of Gaza was announced, Erlich sold 50,000 calves that he imported from Australia to Palestinians in Gaza (Gazans apparently prefer beef to lamb). Erlich, 50, heavyset and white-haired, complains about the severe dent in his income and that of his Gazan partner, Hosni Afana. He believes that Agriculture Minister Simhon, who was involved in shaping the policy regarding import of beef to Gaza, exploited the situation to compel the Gazan market to buy Israeli, and thereby assist local breeders. One way the Palestinians make up for the shortage of beef is by bringing in a large number of sheep via the Rafah tunnels. Unlike other animals, lambs will walk on their own to the other end of the tunnel, so they are easier to smuggle. Veterinary services in Israel estimate that since the start of the blockade, the Palestinians have smuggled in about 40,000 lambs through the tunnels, without any veterinary oversight. The Agriculture Ministry is concerned that these animals could spread epidemics that would eventually reach Israel. Two days before the High Court’s hearing on Erlich’s petition, there was a meeting with attorney Hila Gorny of the State Prosecutor’s Office. At this meeting, Uri Madar, of the agriculture department of the DCO, voiced his concern that the prohibition on importing beef to Gaza was adversely affecting the residents’ nutrition. Colonel Alex Rosenzweig, head of the civilian division of COGAT, argued the opposite, saying there was no shortage of meat in Gaza and the ban on importation of cattle was not endangering the Palestinians’ nutrition. Madar declined to sign the state’s response to the petition, asserting that there was “a black flag waving over it,” and his view was not presented at the High Court hearing. Furthermore, at the hearing, the IDF did not present the COGAT document which states that at least 300 calves are to be imported into Gaza per week. A Justice Ministry spokesperson, responding on behalf of the High Court Petition department, confirms this, adding, “Not only that, the state’s position was never that the weekly quota of 300 calves, which applied for a certain period of time, was defined as a minimal humanitarian need. The position of the COGAT officials charged with assessing the humanitarian situation in Gaza was presented to the court, stipulating that the entire ‘food basket’ that is brought into Gaza, which includes frozen meat products, meets the humanitarian needs there. This position was supported by data presented to the State Prosecutor. These officials also stated that they were informed that this was the case by Palestinian officials with whom they are in contact. Beyond this, the State Prosecutor does not intend to relate to the content of the internal discussions held in anticipation of the filing of responses to the petition.” The spokesperson continues, “Although Erlich is seeking to paint his motives for filing the petition as stemming from concerns about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, he is essentially seeking to promote his business, which is being harmed by government policy on Gaza. The Supreme Court also reached this conclusion.” Erlich’s experience in the ongoing fight to get cattle allowed into Gaza prompted him to establish Adam Solutions, a company devoted to assisting Palestinians in coping with the restrictions imposed on Gaza by the Israeli government. Erlich and his partner Basel Darawshe, son of former MK Abdulwahab Darawshe, hire out their services to wage a public and legal battle for “traders who need to bring in products” or “people who want to go out to get to hospitals.” How would you have helped? “It’s a legitimate and legal activity. What I would have done is go to a journalist, for example, and show how we’re wrecking Israel’s public relations.” Why did they turn to you? “I’m a private businessperson. People come to me because they know I’ve solved more than a few problems because I was determined and clever.” Adiri also spoke about the matter with Bikel, a familiar figure in the flower, fruit and vegetable, and spice export field, who in the early 1990s also headed the Agricultural Strategy Committee, which dealt with agricultural relations with Palestinian farmers, among other things. Bikel remembers the problem with the bulbs: “The authorities wouldn’t allow them to be imported. Hillel asked me if there was anything I could do. I told him that I thought I could do something, but it meant having to appeal to defense officials, to persuade the government and the agriculture minister, the defense minister and the prime minister. It’s a tiring process. It’s work. I told him that remuneration would only be due in the event of success, even though it meant a lot of work either way.” If it was really a security decision, how could it be subject to change? “Decisions can be changed,” Bikel insists. In the end, Adiri did not avail himself of Erlich’s or Bikel’s services. “I asked the Dutch and they said absolutely not,” says Adiri. “But the inquiry showed them that it was possible and motivated them to keep trying. They went to Ehud Barak and he eventually approved it.” Three months ago, an acquaintance walked into the shop run by H., an electronics merchant from Gaza City, and started talking about the situation in Gaza and the difficulty of bringing in goods. Then the acquaintance “casually mentioned” a friend of his who could help in obtaining merchandise. “After he started dropping hints, he told me that for NIS 60,000-70,000 he might be able to bring in my merchandise,” says H. He says he didn’t go for the offer because of the high price. Other merchants say they’ve received offers to get their goods into Gaza for the exorbitant price of anywhere from NIS 40,000-100,000 per truck (the regular cost is about NIS 3,000). At least one admits that because of the ongoing blockade he did accept one such offer from an Israeli shipper. One Israeli shipper explains how merchandise can be smuggled into Gaza. He says shippers often use permits obtained from aid organizations to bring in products Israel does not allow merchants to receive, such as clothing and shoes. “We have no information whatsoever about this,” says a spokesperson for the UN World Food Program. “This question does not apply to us since we use only our own trucks and drivers,” says the International Red Cross. “All of our aid for Gaza is coordinated with the Israeli authorities,” says a UNRWA spokesperson. “We have not encountered the kind of irregularities described. And if we did, we would report them.” How is it possible to do that? “Let’s say a merchant receives a turn to bring in sugar. He relays the name of the driver and the truck number to the Israeli side. The shipper who received the turn contacts another merchant, who didn’t receive a turn and is ready to pay a lot of money to bring in his merchandise, which is stuck in Israel. The shipper arranges with the Palestinian shipper and transfers the sugar to the merchant who paid him. He makes up some story to tell the merchant who was supposed to receive the merchandise – that the truck got stuck or that it wasn’t allowed through for some reason.” Since the blockade was placed on Gaza, the Karni terminal, through which more than 600 trucks used to pass daily has been closed. Now most goods are transferred through the Kerem Shalom crossing, and the only thing in operation at the Karni terminal is a conveyor belt that brings wheat, seeds and animal feed to the Palestinian side. The person who has profited most from this change is Nissim Jan, a former Shin Bet agent who served, among other things, as “head of the crossings department.” In the seven years since he left the Shin Bet security service, he has managed to build himself a little empire that includes a company for logistical services, shipping services and real estate deals; he is currently constructing a building in the Barnea area of Ashkelon, together with contractor Didi Yamin. Jan lives in a villa on the Ashkelon coast, drives a fancy Audi and wears neatly pressed button-down shirts. “Anyone who’s anyone in the PA, and in Israel too apparently, knows me,” he tells Haaretz. Palestinian and Israeli sources say that Jan is particularly close to Nasser Saraj, who oversees the operation of the crossings between Israel and Gaza. Israel and Palestinian sources say that Jan gets a significant cut of this sum, ostensibly as payment for supplying food to the drivers and fuel for the trucks, a cost that cannot exceed more than a few thousand shekels a month. Man’am Shehaiber agreed to describe to Haaretz the way in which merchandise is transported from either side of the terminal. He said he employs 50 people at the crossing, but declined to reply to questions about his income from providing this service or the nature of his business connections with Jan. In addition, says an Israeli familiar with his business, Jan receives payment from the Palestinians for various jobs he does on the western (Gazan) side of the crossing. Jan’s profits seem dazzling to the Palestinians and the other Israelis involved in operating the crossings. One Israeli familiar with their operation says: “The services Jan supplies on both sides of the crossing have made him one of the most significant figures at Kerem Shalom.” Some of the Palestinian traders mistakenly thought that he was the actual director of the crossing. Jan himself attests to his deep involvement there: “Nothing that happens at the crossings escapes my notice,” he told Haaretz in a phone conversation. Sources in the Defense Ministry said that lately they’ve been checking into various complaints about his activity at the crossings. Jan says that he handled, on behalf of the Palestinian Authority, the passage back into Gaza of Palestinians who found themselves stuck in Egypt after Hamas took control in Gaza and the Rafah crossing was closed. “They came to me because you go to people you can rely on,” he says. “I think I’m someone who has a different approach than anyone else at the crossings.” We’ve been told you get a share of the NIS 500 that the Shehaiber family collects on each truck that goes through the crossing. “That’s a total lie.” But you know the Shehaiber brothers? “Of course I do. They work with me every day.” And it’s not a business partnership? “It has nothing at all to do with what you’re talking about. It’s purely business, all legal, and has nothing to do with any 500 shekels.” What is your connection with Nazmi Mhana (the Palestinian director of the crossings)? “Nazmi is a personal friend of mine. For some reason, it’s hard for people to accept a proper, legitimate relationship between two adults.” We’ve been told that you also do jobs for the Palestinians. “All the time, all the time. Including now.” How does one get these kinds of jobs? “Be a person like me – serious, quiet, honest – and apply for any tender in proper legal fashion, and then work. Anyone who wants to can apply.” Doesn’t the Israeli crossings administration have a problem with the fact that you also work in the Palestinian Authority? “I don’t speak with the crossings administration about anything. What I do with the Palestinian population, with the Palestinian Authority, with the Europeans – has nothing to do with that.” A lot of people we’ve talked with seemed genuinely nervous to even speak about you. Why are people afraid of you? “Because I have integrity. Maybe because I don’t deal in dirt.” Maybe because you were in the Shin Bet? “What does the Shin Bet have to do with anything? It’s been 10 years since I was in the Shin Bet.” Jan’s business wasn’t hurt by his entanglement in the affair of the transfer of gas canisters to the Palestinian Authority area. Less than a year ago, in late August, inspectors from the enforcement unit of the Infrastructure Ministry raided warehouses belonging to Jan in the southern industrial zone in Ashkelon. There the inspectors found about 100 tons of cooking gas and reported at the time that this was the largest amount of stolen gas ever discovered in Israel in recent years. The Israel Police’s economic crimes unit began an investigation into the matter. But you paid a fine. “We paid, but not at the crossings. My shippers, who operate legally, stored the gas canisters in a place where they shouldn’t have been stored, and so we paid the fine and I said that it was my merchandise, so I would bear the expenses and the consequences.” Isn’t paying the fine akin to an admission that you committed an offense? “Paying the fine is just a way of saying ‘Leave me alone.’ People just find it hard to accept that I’m not the person they think I am. When I was given the fine, I told [the person from the Infrastructure Ministry] right to his face: I’m paying, even though I think I’m more moral than anyone.” W

Glimpses of America’s Man-Made Disasters

by Trowbridge H. Ford

The Bush administration, especially the Pentagon’s Donald Rumsfeld and DCI Porter Goss, was most concerned about public and media reaction to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita – worried that they might be seen as the culmination of their covert operations coming home to roost, thanks to what Naomi Klein had written in The Nation the previous spring about the rise of disaster capitalism, and what former Malaysian President Mohammad Mahathir had been feared of alluding to before a conference on the environment at Kuala Lumpur shortly after the disasters.

The Secretary of Defense had appointed Peter Geren – a slimy former Congressman hoping to take advantage of Anadarko Petroleum’s windfall profits in the Gulf while attempting to mobilize the country behind the Christian Embassy’s crusade against Islam – as Acting Air Force Secretary to provide cover for the air cowboys in the National Reconnaissance Office while they heated up the Loop Current with satellite lasers for strategic purposes under the official leadership of its new Director, Dr. Donald M. Kerr, who had been sent over from the Agency by Goss to give their operations a veneer of authenticity..

Mahathir’s prepared remarks had been completely sidetracked, though, by a walkout by the Anglo-American diplomatic delegation – apparently triggered by fears that he would give the lowdown on how tropical depressions, ending with Zoé in the Pacific, had been cooked up into cyclones and hurricanes – resulting in an off-the-cuff diatribe about American and British war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. And Klein had alluded in her article to the “Acts of God or Acts of Bush (on orders from God)” which had created disasters from “Iraq to Aceh, Afghanistan to Haiti”. The island republic suffered in 2005 its worst hurricane damage in history, starting with Hurricane Dennis, which killed at least 40 Haitians and left 15,000 homeless.

Still, Fidel Castro made up for Mahathir not saying more about the Katrina disaster by offering the aid of hundreds of doctors, and tons of medical supplies to Katrina’s victims – what he had already done for the hundreds of thousands victims of the Indian Ocean tsunamis, indicating that America’s chickens in weather manipulation had truly come home to roost. The offer was so telling that the White House refused it, telling the Cuban leader to give his own people freedom instead. Cuban had avoided its own cockup over the disaster, surprisingly reminiscent of the 9/11 attacks, by learning to coordinate an effective response to such predictable hazards.

Fortunately, for the Pentagon and the Agency, Klein preferred in her article, “Let the People Rebuild New Orleans” in the September 26th issue of The Nation, to see Katrina’s wake as an opportunity for democracy rather than the result of institutionalized recipes for disaster – what had been the norm for almost all disasters whether they had been natural or man-made in origin. There was no hint that the hurricane was just another example of “vulgar colonialism”, to quote Shalmali Guttal from her earlier piece – a clean slate to be reconstructed by the parallel governments of disaster capitalism as it saw fit. In fact, Klein never even used the term, and has rarely done so since.

The people of New Orleans, according to Klein, would not go quietly in the night, “…scattering across the country to become homeless in countless other cities while federal relief funds are funneled into rebuilding casinos, hotels, and chemical plants…” Community Labor United, a coalition of low-income groups in New Orleans, would not let the area be treated as if it were some third-world disaster site. The $10.5 billion provided by Congress and the $500 million raised by charities, Klein added, belonged to the victimized people, and they should be allowed to use it in ways they saw fit, not like what happened to the people of Sri Lanka after the devastating Indian Ocean tsunami. If the inhabitants of Mexico City could force their government to rebuild their community after the devastating earthquake in 1985, the people of New Orleans could do the same.

Unfortunately, this proved to be a complete pipedream, as Klein herself duly recorded in The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, though the role of disasters – hurricanes, cyclones, and earthquakes – were sorely missing in helping explain the process until it came to Katrina. There was no mention of the consequences of any cyclone, especially Cyclone Zoé, which had wreaked such physical, financial and social havoc in the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean whatever their cause. There was no mention of other hurricanes which had regularly pounded Cuba, not even the devastation caused to the island by Katrina – only what Hurricane Mitch had conveniently done by mass flooding to the troublesome states of Honduras, Nicaragua, and Guatemala in Central America in October 1998. (pp. 500-1) And earthquakes – especially the ones in Iran around the Manjil-Rudbar area, and in the ancient city of Bam in anticipation of the two Gulf Wars, and the one in Turkey at Izmit in 1999, whatever caused them – were surprisingly not included among the tactics of disaster capitalism.

Shock doctrine, the less insidious term according to the expert on the subject, was essentially caused by various neo-cons, especially from Chicago and Harvard Universities, who persuaded Southern Cone dictators to adopt unfettered capitalism whatever the cost and consequences, and when they were overthrown, their successors liquidated their debts by essentially scrapping whatever was required at great social and economic cost to satisfy lenders, particularly the IMF and the World Bank “Believers in the shock doctrine,” she conveniently concluded, “are convinced that only a great rupture – a flood, a war, a terrorist attack – can generate the kind of vast, clean canvases they crave.” (p. 25. N. b. the examples she chooses.)

This was all the more amazing since she finally concluded that the devastation to the Gulf coast by Katrina was the best example of disaster capitalism, with its Green and Red Zones of parallel infrastructures for rich and poor, and at the expense of established government: “Under Bush, the state still has all the trappings of a government – the impressive buildings, presidential press briefings, policy battles – but it no more does the actual work of governing than the employees at Nike’s Beavereton campus stitch running shoes.” (p. 528) In saying all this, her September 2005 article about letting the people rebuild New Orleans is nowhere to be seen.

Most important, this most restricted view of the role of disasters, especially their causes – whether they be natural or man-made of some sort or another – had already experienced the unprecedented feedback by Senator Jay Rockefeller and a few other Democratic colleagues on its Intelligence Committee – publicly objecting the previous December to yet another NRO Misty satellite being in the works, action which he had twice tried to stop, and called “totally unjustified and very, very wasteful and dangerous to the national security.” What he was referring to – though no one had yet claimed sigint satellites “very, very… dangerous” – was so sensitive that the NRO had called upon the Justice Department to look into the prosecution of any alleged leaker.

Klein’s failure to investigate the ramifications of this development, much less write about it – given what happened during the 2005 hurricane season – is simply mystifying.

For more, see this link:

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/12/16/senate_democrats_protest_top_secret_spy

Of course, given this essential news blackout about covert possibilities, the NRO was able to move quickly against the growing problems in Pakistan whose Balochistan, Federally Administrated Tribal Areas (FATA), North-West Frontier Province, Swat Valley and Pakistan-Administered Kashmir were becoming increasingly Taliban and Al-Qaeda dominated despite what Washington had dictated to strong-man President Pervez Musharraf. He had staged a coup in 1999 against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif over the conduct of the war with India over Kashmir, and received $10.5 billion in aid from the West, once he had capitulated to threats of being attacked unless he didn’t join the so-called war on terror. While he supplied three airbases for the conduct of Operation Enduring Freedom, he never really went after the Taliban because of his own strategic interests, causing so much consternation in Washington that it finally decided to fix the problem as best it could.

About the situation around 2005, Ahmed Rashid has written in the latest issue of The New York Review of Books, “Pakistan on the Brink,” the target area had become a absolute powderkeg, thanks to the inaction of the Musharraf regime though somehow making no mention of the earthquake. Maulana Muhamed had so used his FM radio station with inflammatory messages in the Swat valley that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban built up several more stations and an army for him. In FATA, the Pashtun tribal leaders had organized their own militias, and plans for the liberation of Pakistan, slitting the throats of some 300 pro-government ones in the process. In the meantime, the Afghan Taliban, thanks to the inaction of the relevant Pakistani authorities and the assistance from FATA and Balochistan, revived their insurgency in Afghanistan. And extremist Punjabi groups joined the mix after Pakistan’s relations with India over Kashmir cooled down.

Pakistan, like most of the countries between China and Morocco, has its own system of qanats, called karezes. These are the underground systems of water collection which rely upon a central well from the surface to supply entrance to a collecting chamber at the lowest ground level, so that fields can be irrigated, and populations supplied with the basic essential. They can be vast distances in length with tunnels along the way for more collections, and proper ventilation, While Iran was thought to be the source of Pakistan’s systems – what the NRO had taken advantage of in making its 1990 and 2003 earthquakes – actually its are now believed to have come from Afghanistan. While pipes have replaced tunnels in many Pakistani kerezes, making them less manipulable from outside forces, delay-action dams to collect more water have made them more unstable if so attacked.

For more, see this link:

http://pakistaniat.com/2006/09/20/karez-balochistan-pakistan-irrigation/

Again, Professor Zhoughao Shou predicted the Paskistani earthquake, as he had those off the coast of Aceh in November-December 2004, but no one in a position of authority took them seriously. In the December 2006 issue of the “New Concepts in Global Tectonics” Newsletter, he laid out his findings about recent serious earthquakes in “Precursor of the Largest Earthquake of the Last Forty Years,” pp. 3-12. His critics believed that earthquakes always started deep underground, thanks to tectonic plates crashing together, and that there were never visible precursors of them. Shou continued to say that his vapor theory about cloud formation over earthquake epicenters, and their unexpected movement, contrary to usual weather patterns, demonstrated otherwise.

After a discussion of Shou’s claims, the newsletter concluded: “This work demonstrates that the vapor theory does not give false warnings. Shou’s recent investigation shows that all earthquakes of magnitude 7 or above in the world from June 1993 to October 2005 have a vapor precursor. In contrast, government seismologists worldwide have not yet made a precise and reliable prediction.” This seems to say more about their character than that of various earthquakes.

Still, Shou made no attempt to explain the cause of the cloud formations, and many of them could well be from plates rubbing together, volcanic action, etc. The Pakistani one appeared just too convenient politically, and suspiciously connected to the Misty satellite passing overhead every 90 minutes to be of natural origin. The next to last passage overhead caused a minor earthquake, and after all the inhabitants around Muzaffarabad had gone back to bed after their morning tea, as it was Ramadam, the devastating one occurred 90 minutes later, killing 75,000 people, and rendering another 500,000 homeless.

When the Musharraf government acted most positively to offers of assistance, Washington was uncharacteristically most supportive for disaster relief occurring anywhere along the “axis of evil”. It airlifted 1,200 military personnel, 162 cargo lifts of equipment, and 1,900 tons of supplies. With the opening up of the Taliban-dominated area to American forces, the Agency for International Development Administrator Andrew Natsios announced to a November Reconstruction Conference that it was providing the Paskistanis with $300 million in aid, the Pentagon was throwing in another $110 million, and private charities would be adding another $100 million.

Despite all the hoopla about this assistance of save the living, and subsequent aid to help them progress, Pakistan is in even worse shape than Afghanistan, thanks in part to the continuing silence by those in the media and in politics who know about its real causes but have failed to speak out, as Rashid has concluded:

“In Pakistan there is no such broad national identity or unity. Many young Balochs today are fiercely determined to create an independent Balochistan. The ethnic identities of the people in the other provinces have become a driving force for disunity. The gap between the rich and poor has never been greater….There is confusion about what actually constitutes a threat to the state and what is need for nation-building.” (p. 16)

Until the United States sorts out its confusions about these same matters, especially the use of force in nation-building, it will only get worse, as we shall see.

This is Iran’s campaign!

The US has warned Iran to control the riots and give the people of Iran fair elections.  There have been riots in France, UK and US – did Iran, Pakistan or Iraq demand that those countries ”control the situation”? The colonialist mentality of the “civilised” controlling the “savages” still prevails.

3

Protestors set fires in a main street in Tehran, Iran in the early hours of Monday, June 15, 2009. Iran’s supreme leader ordered Monday an investigation into allegations of election fraud, marking a stunning turnaround by the country’s most powerful figure and offering hope to opposition forces who have waged street clashes to protest the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (AP Photo) #

4

Young men run past a burning bus during a riot in Tehran on June 13, 2009. (OLIVIER LABAN-MATTEI/AFP/Getty Images) #

5

A riot-police officer strikes a man with a baton near Tehran University on June 14, 2009. Iran’s defeated presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi said on Sunday he has asked the powerful Guardians Council to cancel the result of the presidential poll, while urging his supporters to continue peaceful protests. (STR/AFP/Getty Images) #

7

Iranian students, supporters of presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi, try to keep clear of tear gas being lobbed back and forth at the main entrance of Tehran University during riots on Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP Photo) #

9

Iranian supporters of reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi gather on the streets protesting the results of the Iranian presidential election in Tehran, Iran, Saturday, June 13, 2009. (AP photo) #

11

Supporters of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and members of the Basij militia hurl stones towards supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi who are inside Tehran University on Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP Photo) #

12

Backers of defeated Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi are beaten by government security men during riots in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP Photo) #

13

Riot policemen deploy in Tehran’s Enghelab square to disperse protesters demonstrating against the election results in Tehran on June 14, 2009. (AFP/Getty Images) #

15

A motorcycle burns in a street of Tehran, Iran on Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP photo/Vahid Salemi) #

16

An injured backer of Mir Hossein Mousavi covers his bloodied face during riots in Tehran on June 13, 2009. (OLIVIER LABAN-MATTEI/AFP/Getty Images) #

17

A supporter of defeated presidential candidate Mousavi is beaten by government security men as fellow supporters come to his aid during riots in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP Photo) #

18

A man with a cane gestures towards a woman on the ground during protests in central Tehran June 14, 2009. (REUTERS/Stringer) #

19

Supporters of defeated Iranian presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi are followed by Iranian riot-police with batons in front of Tehran University during riots in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, June 14, 2009. (AP Photo) #

Irani woman particiates in the protests.

 

Iranis save a police man after hewas attacked by Mousavi supporters (Getty Images)

Democratic India uses rape and terror to intimidate Kashmiris

News 20th June 2009   Thousands of troops patrolled the streets of Indian Kashmir as businesses, schools and government offices closed in protest Saturday as locals continued to accuse Indian soldiers of raping and killing two young women last month. The protests, sometimes deadly, have continued since the bodies of the 17-year-old girl and her 22-year-old sister-in-law were found in a stream May 30. Police initially said they appeared to have drowned. A week later, amid the massive demonstrations across the disputed, mostly Muslim region, the police registered a case of rape and murder. They have not named any suspects. Human rights groups and separatist leaders have long accused the Indian military of using rape and sexual molestation to intimidate the local population. The Indian military as well as paramilitary forces, who include both Hindus and Muslims as well as other religions, have not responded to the allegations. The closure of almost all shops and businesses in the Muslim-majority area across Indian Kashmir Saturday was called for by the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, Kashmir’s main separatist conglomerate of nonviolent political groups, to protest the deaths. Thousands of government forces in riot gear and armed with automatic weapons patrolled the deserted streets of Srinagar and erected steel barricades and strung razor wire across roads to prevent protests. Authorities have barred any gathering of more than five people. Two people have been killed and more than 400 others injured in numerous angry protests and clashes between demonstrators and police, especially in Shopian, a town 35 miles (60 kilometers) south of Indian Kashmir’s main city Srinagar, where the women’s bodies were found. The state government has ordered a judicial probe into the deaths, but rights groups say such probes rarely yield results and are often meant only to calm public anger. Most in Kashmir favor independence from Hindu-majority India or a merger with predominantly Muslim Pakistan. The region is divided between the two nuclear-armed neighbors, and both claim the region in its entirety and have fought two wars over it. Militant separatist groups have been fighting since 1989 to end Indian rule. More than 68,000 people, most of them civilians, have been killed in the uprising and subsequent Indian crackdown.

A Weaver’s Welcome

by Kathy Kelly

Shortly after arriving in Pakistan, one week ago, we met a weaver and his extended family, numbering 76 in all, who had been forcibly displaced from their homes in Fathepur, a small village in the Swat Valley.

Fighting between the Pakistani military and the Taliban had intensified. Terrified by aerial bombing and anxious to leave before a curfew would make flight impossible, the family packed all the belongings they could carry and fled on foot. It was a harrowing four-day journey over snow-covered hills. Leaving their village, they faced a Taliban checkpoint where a villager trying to leave had been assassinated that same morning. Fortunately, a Taliban guard let them pass. Walking many miles each day, with 45 children and 22 women, they supported one another as best they could. Men took turns carrying a frail grandmother on their shoulders. One woman gave birth to her baby, Hamza, on the road. When they arrived, exhausted, at a rest stop in the outskirts of Islamabad, they had no idea where to go next.

While there, the weaver struck up a conversation with a man whom he’d never met before. He told the man about the family’s plight. Hearing that they were homeless, the man invited them to live with him and his family in a large building which he is renovating. He offered to put the reconstruction on hold so that the family could move into the upper stories of his building.

The weaver was also fortunate to have known, for many years, a family that had sold his art work through a small shop in Islamabad. Women in this family have been working, as volunteers, to assist refugees who’ve come to Islamabad. They and their companions have delivered one thousand “food kits,” plus cots, mats and cooking supplies, to desperately needy people. Two of the women, Fauzia and Ghazala, invited our small delegation to visit the weaver and his family, in Islamabad’s Bara Koh neighborhood.

When we arrived, older men and boys were outside, ready to unload a truck delivering mats and flour. The generous building owner invited members of our group into his home, on the ground floor, where plans were already being made to turn the top floor into a school for the children.

Several tots led me upstairs to meet their grandparents. The elderly couple sat, cross-legged, on cots. When we entered, the grandmother stood, embraced me, and then softly wept for several minutes. Soon, about 20 men, women and children clustered around the cots. All listened attentively while one of the weaver’s brothers, Abdullah Shah, spoke with pride about the school in Fathepur where he had been a headmaster. The village had three schools, and his school was so successful that even Taliban families sent their children to study there. Now, the Taliban has destroyed all of the schools in Fathepur.

He and his brothers wonder what their future will be. How and when can they return to their village? And how will they start over? The crops are ruined, livestock have died, and land mines have been laid. Most of the shops and businesses have been destroyed. Many homes are demolished.

The trauma endured by the refugees is overwhelming. Yet, numerous individuals and groups have swiftly extended hospitality and emergency aid. We visited a Sikh community, in Hassan Abdal, which has taken in hundreds of Sikhs, housing them inside a large and very famous shrine. Nearby, we stayed for several days in Tarbela, where families in very simple dwellings have welcomed their relatives. The townspeople quietly took up a collection to support the refugee families. Some of the townspeople accompanied us to Ghazi, just up the road from Tarbela, where 155 people are staying in an abandoned hospital, relying entirely on the generosity of their new neighbors. Doctors from Lahore invited two of us to go with them to villages near Mardan, where people from the Swat Valley are still arriving. The doctors were part of a project organized jointly through Rotary Lahore, Pakistan Medical Aid, and Jahandan, which has worked with area councils to convert schools into refugee centers. The doctors take turns, several times a week, delivering relief shipments and helping supervise distribution.

Generosity in the face of such massive displacement and suffering is evident everywhere we go. But Pakistan needs help on a much larger scale. The U.S. has pledged 100 million dollars toward relief efforts. Two other disclosures about money budgeted for Pakistan should be considered in light of the unbearable burdens borne by close to two million new refugees. First is the decision to spend 800 million dollars to renovate and expand the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad and to upgrade security at U.S. consular offices elsewhere in the country. Secondly, the U.S. will spend 400 million dollars, in 2009, to teach counter-insurgency tactics to Pakistan’s military. The 2010 Defense Spending budget requests an additional 700 million for counter-insurgency training in Pakistan.

What would happen if U.S. officials put plans to expand the U.S. Embassy on hold? Suppose the U.S. were to declare that helping alleviate the misery of people forcibly displaced by Taliban violence and the recent military offensive is a top priority, one that trumps spending money on renovating and expanding the U.S. Embassy.

Suppose that the U.S. were to redirect funds designated to train counterinsurgents and instead make these funds available to help alleviate impoverishment in Pakistan. No one seems to know how the Taliban are funded, but they clearly use large sums of money to build their ranks, giving each new recruit 25,000 rupees, a sum that exceeds what a teacher earns in one year. In villages where people don’t have enough resources to feed their children, the Taliban would initially move in with plans to build schools and offer two meals a day, plus clean clothes, to the children. Later, they would exercise increasingly fierce control over villages. But their initial forays into villages were marked by offers to reduce the gaps between “haves and have-nots.”

Enormous resources will be spent to “crush” the Taliban, and as always happens in warfare, the bloodshed will fuel acts of revenge and retaliation.

The relationship that began when a stranger took the risk of offering shelter to a weaver holds a lesson worth heeding.

The weaver and his family will never forget the extraordinary, immediate kindness extended to them when a man put his renovation project on hold so that he could help them find shelter in his building.

The U.S. could help assure that every Pakistani family displaced by the fighting has enough to eat and the security of at least a temporary home. It would be an unusual but sensible homeland security initiative within Pakistan. And it would be a signpost pointing to greater security for the United States. The maxim that guides this idea is simple: to counter terror, build justice. Build justice predicated on the belief that each person has basic human rights, and that we have a collective responsibility to share resources so that those rights are met. This means eliminating the unjust and unfair gap between the “haves” and the “have-nots.” It means weaving new relationships that don’t rely on guns and bombs for security.

Kathy Kelly (kathy@vcnv.org) co-coordinates Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Along with Dan Pearson, Steve Kelly, Gene Stoltzfus and Razia Ahmed, she is visiting cities and villages in Pakistan.

Torture used to seek justification for war

by Paul Woodward of  The National

In the early weeks of the war in Iraq, Muhammed Khudayr al-Dulaymi, head of the M-14 section of Iraq’s Mukhabarat, one of Saddam Hussein’s secret police organisations, was captured by US forces. Officials in the Bush White House had a particular interest in this individual since his responsibilities included contacts with extremist groups and thus it was thought that he might confirm the existence of a relationship between al Qa’eda and the deposed regime.

“To those who wanted or suspected a relationship, he would have been a guy who would know, so [White House officials] had particular interest,” Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraqi Survey Group and the man in charge of interrogations of Iraqi officials, told Robert Windrem.

“In his new book, Hide and Seek: The Search for Truth in Iraq, and in an interview with The Daily Beast, Duelfer says he heard from ’some in Washington at very senior levels (not in the CIA),’ who thought Khudayr’s interrogation had been ‘too gentle’ and suggested another route, one that they believed has proven effective elsewhere. ‘They asked if enhanced measures, such as waterboarding, should be used,’ Duelfer writes. ‘The executive authorities addressing those measures made clear that such techniques could legally be applied only to terrorism cases, and our debriefings were not as yet terrorism-related. The debriefings were just debriefings, even for this creature.’

“Duelfer will not disclose who in Washington had proposed the use of waterboarding, saying only: ‘The language I can use is what has been cleared.’ In fact, two senior US intelligence officials at the time tell The Daily Beast that the suggestion to waterboard came from the Office of Vice President Cheney. Cheney, of course, has vehemently defended waterboarding and other harsh techniques, insisting they elicited valuable intelligence and saved lives.”

While in this instance so-called enhanced interrogation techniques were not used, there were other occasions in which these methods were used to derive information for a purpose other than the one for which they had been approved – to derive intelligence about imminent threats to the United States following the 9/11 attacks.

Col Lawrence B Wilkerson, the former chief of staff for then-US Secretary of State Colin Powell, wrote: “what I have learned is that as the administration authorised harsh interrogation in April and May of 2002 – well before the Justice Department had rendered any legal opinion – its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the US but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al Qa’eda.

“So furious was this effort that on one particular detainee, even when the interrogation team had reported to Cheney’s office that their detainee ‘was compliant’ (meaning the team recommended no more torture), the VP’s office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods. The detainee had not revealed any al Qa’eda-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, ‘revealed’ such contacts. Of course later we learned that al-Libi revealed these contacts only to get the torture to stop.

“There in fact were no such contacts. (Incidentally, al-Libi just ‘committed suicide’ in Libya. Interestingly, several US lawyers working with tortured detainees were attempting to get the Libyan government to allow them to interview al-Libi….)

In The Guardian, Andy Worthington noted: “News of the death, in a Libyan jail, of Ibn al-Shaikh al-Libi, a US terror suspect who was the subject of an extraordinary rendition, then tortured in Egypt and Jordan as well as CIA prisons in Afghanistan and Poland has, understandably, raised questions about whether he committed suicide – as the Libyan authorities claimed – or whether he was murdered. Just two weeks ago, representatives of Human Rights Watch saw him in Tripoli’s Abu Salim prison, and although he refused to speak to them, they reported that he ‘looked well’.

“Al-Libi’s death should also raise uncomfortable questions for former US vice-president Dick Cheney, who is still turning up with alarming regularity on US television, peddling his claims that the use of torture saved America from further terrorist attacks. The focus on al-Libi should be a stark reminder that, when he was rendered to Egypt in early 2002, the CIA’s proxy torturers extracted a false confession from him – that al Qa’eda operatives had received training from Saddam Hussein in the use of chemical and biological weapons – which was used not to protect the US from attack, but to justify the invasion of Iraq.”

As the US Senate opened its first hearing exploring the alleged torture of detainees, Scott Horton wrote: “Sen Sheldon Whitehouse opened [the] hearing … quoting [the French diplomat] Talleyrand: ‘The greatest danger in times of crisis comes from the zeal of those who are inexperienced.’ Whitehouse promised to separate the ‘truth’ from its ‘bodyguard of lies.’ In doing so, the former federal prosecutor brought the shadowy world of intelligence into Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Former star FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, widely described as the bureau’s best and most effective interrogator working in the Arabic language, testified off-camera and behind a wooden partition. Concerned for his and his family’s security, he made the unusual demand a part of his agreement to appear and testify.

“The hearing produced two significant developments as well as a great deal of political rhetoric. Soufan’s testimony focused on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. Throughout the history of the torture debate, the Bush administration has cited this as a triumph of its techniques. Sen Whitehouse read Bush’s September 6, 2006, White House statement making one of these claims. Soufan, who was personally present through the process, called the Bush claims a ‘half-truth,’ accurate as to the circumstances of Abu Zubaydah’s capture and detention, but not as to the claimed successes using highly coercive techniques. One of the Justice Department’s torture memos (from May 2005) contained a similar claim that actionable intelligence was obtained ‘once enhanced techniques were employed.’ Soufan termed this a lie. He also noted that successful interrogations of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Jose Padilla, which gained useful intelligence, occurred before the introduction of the Bush programme and therefore couldn’t be claimed as success stories for it. In his remarks, Soufan sharply repudiated the harsh techniques he observed. ‘These techniques… are ineffective, slow, and unreliable and, as a result, harmful to our efforts to defeat al Qa’eda,’ he said.”

For Republicans in Congress, the debate on torture has largely been an unwelcome distraction from their own efforts at political rehabilitation after their electoral defeat – until that is a dispute flared up between Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, and the CIA.

Ms Pelosi, who has strongly advocated for the creation of an independent truth commission to investigate the former administration’s use of torture, claimed this week that the CIA had lied when asserting that its officials had briefed her on the use of waterboarding in September 2002.

Ms Pelosi’s accusation led the Director of the CIA, Leon Panetta to issue a statement, addressed to CIA employees, saying: “Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress.”

The New York Times reported: “Should any investigation determine that the CIA misled members of Congress, the result could be severely damaging to the agency and to the Republican leaders who have relentlessly pressed the issue against Ms Pelosi.

“Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator from Florida, who as the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee underwent a briefing similar to Ms Pelosi’s about three weeks after hers, sides with the speaker. He said he recalled a ‘bland’ session.

” ‘I do not have any recollection that day of there being a discussion of something that would have been as neon as waterboarding or other torture techniques,’ Mr Graham said.

“He said his confidence in the CIA’s account of the briefings had also been shaken by what he said was an incorrect assertion by the agency that he had been briefed on four dates. Mr Graham, who famously keeps a detailed record of his daily activities, checked and determined that the agency was wrong about three dates and that he had attended only one session before leaving the Intelligence Committee.

” ‘This is just a small chapter of a long, long book of CIA inaccuracies, particularly in the early part of this decade,’ he said.”

A poem on ignorance

You tell me Islam is a faith with a sword to the juggular

That my religion is faith with a vengence

Hatered for freedom, democracy and everything Western

“Why do you defend a religion with the blood of 3000 innocent people?”

Burning towers etched in my mind

Soul hurting with the sound of screams

Jumping from windows like wingless doves.

I saw.

I cried.

How dare you suggest I do not feel, that I do not care?

I ask you:

How can you defend an ideology which has slaughtered millions of innocents lives?

How can you defend the very ideology which defends it’s right to invade, torture and terrorise in the name of democracy?

Now tell me who is blind

Your silence speaks louder than a thousand words.

Muslim head of religion at the BBC

Aaqil Ahmed confirmed BBC head of religion amidst controversy
May 12, 2009

The BBC made its widely expected announcement yesterday that Channel 4 commissioner Aaqil Ahmed had been appointed its new head of religion.

He will become the corporation’s first Muslim to occupy the post, and the second appointee ever from a non-Christian background.

The decision is also likely to trigger a crisis at Channel 4, where he was recently appointed head of multicultural programming. There he had a ringfenced budget of £2 million to commission prime-time programming aimed at a diverse audience.

Aaqil Ahmed’s full title at the BBC will be ‘Head of Religion & Ethics and Commissioning Editor for Religion TV’, combining two previously separate roles at the BBC. The change is significant because it makes him commissioner of programming as well as head of department.

That is more in line with his previous work at Channel 4 and reason why he was considered a front-runner for the position.

News of the appointment is likely to come under heavy fire from right-wing media papers such as the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail, both of which had run articles implying he was unfit for the position because of his background.

Ahmed had also come under heavy fire from the controversial Christian lobby group Christian Concern For Our Nation. It had urged its member to write to the BBC objecting to his appointment on grounds that he was Muslim.

A particularly vociferous campaign against him was also mounted by the Telegraph’s religion editor George Pitcher.

In an article two weeks ago, AIM magazine editor Sunny Hundal criticised much of the controversy that surrounded Aaqil Ahmed’s potential appointment.

In the press coverage Sikh executive producer Tommy Nagra also came under fire for being a non-Christian responsible for the key Christian programme Songs of Praise.

He previously told AIM magazine: “For many years I worked in and headed up multicultural programmes and hired the best people to do the job – it is like me saying that you have to be black or Asian to produce programmes about black or Asian subject matter, which is utter nonsense and frankly an outdated argument and line of reasoning.”

A BBC spokesman said the corporation appointed individuals “on the basis of talent and suitability to the role, regardless of their faith or background”.

Yesterday, Christina Rees, a member of the Archbishops’ Council, said: “Aaqil Ahmed is a respected professional who has an established record of producing programmes on religion and ethics.”

She added: “It is important that the Christian faith continues to receive coverage that accurately reflects its significance in the lives of most people who live in Britain, the overwhelming majority of whom regard themselves as Christian.”

The Telegraph only reported the second half of her comments yesterday night.

The Bachelor: Taliban style

Original story in The Hindustani Times

Taliban militants in Pakistan’s northwestern Swat valley have set up a special bureau for arranging “love marriages” for couples barred by their families from tying the knot with partners of their choice.

The bureau named ‘Shuba-e-Aroosat´, which is headed by Taliban commander Abu Ammad, has arranged 11 “love marriages” in the past nine days, militant spokesman Muslim Khan was quoted as saying by BBC Urdu service.

Another 300 men and women are waiting for their turn to marry. “The love marriage aspirants contact the bureau on a fixed telephone number. The Taliban collect their particulars and then contact their families to arrange these marriages,” Khan said.

Islam allows every adult to marry according to his own choice, he said. “Most of the girls or their families who contacted us wished to marry militant Taliban,” Khan claimed.

Some analysts said the Taliban were paving the way for militants to marry women of their choice. Some people have also questioned how the militants could allow the flogging of men and women for being seen together in public while at the same time facilitating the youth to marry according to their own choice.