Friday, June 16, 2006

"Al Qaeda is already in possession of WMD"

* emptywheel has a big post on Rove. fascinating discussion in the comments as always (albeit dizzying in detail, as always)

* this from a commentor at EW's place


I agree with you that the military dictatorship of Pakistan is a greater WMD threat than Iran. After all, it was AQ Khan’s network that provided nuclear technology to the Iranians. You are also right that “the best focus of efforts right now is Pakistan, not Iran”; and that “until the U.S. begin to address the Pakistan problem it’s never going to address the real threat in Iran or anywhere else”.

I’ve personally met AQ Khan on a few occasions in Islamabad, and can assure you that he is simply an employee of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, a subsidiary of Pakistan’s Ministry of Defense (MOD). In 1998, soon after Pakistan conducted six nuclear tests, Congress enacted the Pressler Amendment and imposed economic and military sanctions on Pakistan.

Due to financial constraints, MOD decided to sell nuclear technology to anyone who was willing to pay top dollar. Khan simply followed the orders of his bosses in uniform, and was given full military cover to conduct nuclear proliferation. He’s only the scapegoat; the real culprit is the Pakistani MOD, and as you’ve already heard that Khan’s rogue network is still operational. No wonder why Pakistani military regime is reluctant to allow Khan to be interrogated by the U.S. authorities.

I have strong reservations about your assertion that “if Musharraf fell, Al Qaeda could have the bomb within weeks”. For your information, it’s safe to assume that Al Qaeda is already in possession of WMD, and Hamas (supported by Iran) will soon have access to such weapons.

It was Pakistan’s spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) that created the Talibans in Pakistan and then sent them across its borders into Afghanistan. And, the ISI also facilitated the creation of Al Qaeda in the Pakistani city of Peshawar. To this day, ISI is providing logistic, training and weapons to these two terrorist organizations along with other Islamic terrorists groups, especially ones that have terrorized Kashmir region in India. Also, the world’s top three terrorists, Bin Laden, Al Zawahri, and Mullah Omar, are living in Pakistan under state protection. Arresting low-level operatives to appease Washington is only a ploy to be considered “an ally in the war against terrorism” and con military aid of about $650 million per year from U.S taxpayers.

During President Bush’s recent visit to Afghanistan, the Afghan President Hamid Karzai provided him with conclusive proof of ISI’s involvement in destabilizing Afghanistan. This is a very serious allegation because it means that any attack on U.S. and Coalition forces in Afghanistan by Al Qaeda and Taliban operatives is done with the consent and support of the Pakistani military regime. In other words, Pakistanis have waged a proxy war against the U.S. (Check article in the Investor’s Business Daily)

The British chief of staff for southern Afghanistan, Colonel Chris Vernon, added his voice to charges often made by Afghan officials that the Taliban leadership is coordinating its campaign from the Pakistani city of Quetta near the Afghan border.

"The thinking piece of the Taliban is out of Quetta in Pakistan. It's the major headquarters," he told the Guardian newspaper. "They use it to run a series of networks in Afghanistan."

By the way, there was no reason for the Pakistanis to succumb to U.S. pressure because of some textile deal! On January 2005, the World Trade Organization (WTO) was already going to abolish the textile quota regime, which restricted textile exports from Pakistan to the U.S. market. Hence, it was not in anyone’s interest to make such deals.

The truth of the matter is that the Pakistani military dictator Pervez Musharraf did not agree to cooperate with the U.S. after the tragic incident of 9/11. Only when President Bush challenged him to either face the U.S. military might, or join the U.S. and oust the Talibans, did Musharraf pragmatically teamed up with the Coalition forces and pretended to turn his back to the Talibans.

The wooing is not as much between Iran and Pakistan as it is between China and Pakistan. China has built listening posts at the Gwadar Port to monitor shipping lanes (and U.S. naval activities) at the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. There are over 2,000 Chinese working on various civilian and military projects throughout Pakistan worth over $5 billion. China has constructed highways through Pakistan to connect with the Arabian Sea. The Chinese are fortifying their positions in Pakistan while the U.S. is engaged in fighting a proxy war with Pakistani trained Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan.

In short, Pakistan has played the Americans into believing that they are pro-American, while they were busy solidifying their position with China and supporting the Al Qaeda and Taliban to kill American soldiers.

Congress must realize that the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world is the Pakistani military regime that has ruled Pakistan (directly and indirectly) since 1947. All military assistance and economic aid to this rogue country must cease immediately. The most dangerous threat to U.S. national security now is how to dismantle and destroy Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.

Mir Azaad Khan Baloch
General Secretary
The Government of Balochistan in Exile

* sara is smart, and she agrees:
I agree with much of what Mir Azaad Khan Baloch has written above. The state of play for Pakistan is alliance with China in service of Pakistan's India circumstance that has existed since Partition. Just this week one of the major English Language Pakistani papers had a long detailed editorial regarding this -- I think it was the Tribune, but am not certain.

One matter that has suprised me is the lack of attention to Bush's Nuclear deal with India, to which Pakistan responded by advocating greater cooperation with China. All for an agreement on trade in Mangos? come on -- where is the US market for more mangos?

It might make sense to check in on the GenSec's blog every now and again.


Don said...

It just doesn't get any simpler in the Mid-East, does it?

1998 does fit the timeframe, though.

lukery said...

perhaps if we legalize drugs, and outlaw arms we might solve some of the problems

Tate said...

I think we are going to have to look to a Higher Power to get us out of this mess with Fitz' throwing in the towel like kerry did.

The Horse Whisperers by Nicholas Evans page 87

The only time he remembered his father happy during this time was in the spring when for three days, they drove the cattle up to the summer pastures. His mother, Frank and Rosie came too and the five of them would ride all day and sleep out under the stars.

"If only you could make now last forever,' Frank said on one of those nights while they lay on their backs watching a huge half-moon roar up out of the dark shoulders of the mountain. Frank was eleven and not by nature a philosopher. They had all lain still, thinking about this for a while. Somewhere a long way off, a coyote called.

"I guess that's all forever is," his father replied. "Just one long trail of nows. And I guess all you can do is try and live one now at a time without getting too worked up about the last now or the next now."

It seemed to Tom as good a recipe for life as he'd yet heard.

Three years of lawsuits left his father a broken man. The ranch ended up sold to an oil company and the money that remained, after the lawyers and the taxman had taken their cut, was split in half with Ned. Ned (his father's brother) was never seen or heard of again. Daniel and Ellen took Tom, Rosie and Frank and moved away west. They bought seven thousand acres and an old sprawl of a ranch house on the Rocky Mountain Front. It was where the high plains ran smak into a hundred-million-year-old wall of limestone, a place of harsh, towering beauty, which later Tom would come to love. But he wasn't ready for it.

His real home had been sold from under him and he wanted to be off on his own. Once he had helped his parents get the new ranch going, he upped and left. He went down to Wyoming and worked as a hired hand. There he saw things he would never have believed, cowboys who whipped and spurred their horse till they bled. At a ranch near Sheridan he saw for himself why they called it "breaking" a horse. He watched a man tie a yearling tight by its neck to a fence, hobble a hind leg then beat it into submission with a length of zinc
piping. Tom would never forget the fear in the animal's eyes nor the
stupid triumph in the man's when, many hours later, it sought to save its life and submitted to the saddle.

Tom told the man he was a fool, got into a fight and was fired on the spot.

He moved to Nevada, and worked some of the big ranches there. Wherever he worked, he made a point of seeking out the most troubled horses and offering to ride them. Many of the men he rode with had been doing the job since long before he was born and, to begin, with, they would snigger behind their hands at the sight of him mounting some crazy beast that had thrown the best of them a dozen times. They soon stopped though when they saw the way the boy handled himself and how the horse changed. Tom lost count of the horses he meet who had been seriously screwed up the stupidity or cruelty of humans, but he never met one he couldn't help.

For five years, this was his life. he came home when he could and always tried to be there for the times his father most need help. For Ellen, these visits were like a series of snapshots plotting her son's progression into manhood. ...

As time went by, people got to hear about the Booker boy and calls would come to wherever he happened to be working, asking if he would take a look at some horse or other they were having trouble with.

Develop you innate Healing abilities.

noise said...

Interesting analysis. Though it does sound like Mir Azaad Khan Baloch is pushing an agenda of sorts.

This ties back into AQ Khan lack of US pressure to get information and the lack of US cooperation with the Swiss. Which ties into the whole nuclear black market operation. Remember the strange meetings between high ranking US government officials and Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad (ISI chief) right around 9/11? Alexandrovna suggests the date may not be as important as some people suggest but the meetings are noteworthy. What issues were being discussed?

Many 9/11 researchers have made links between the CIA and the ISI, suggesting the chain is CIA>ISI>Al Qaeda.

Bush Co. supports preemptive wars due to WMD's yet one of the leading allies in the WoT is involved in nuclear proliferation in the region and aids the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Yeah. That makes sense. Rational policy there.

Bush Co. knows what they are doing. It would be a mistake to think they are being deceived by Musharraf. The thing is Bush Co.'s agenda is not necessarily in the best interests of the US. Meaning the WoT isn't about keeping Americans safe, rather it is about consolidating power and transferring wealth to Bush Co. friendly corporations. My guess is that "no attacks since 9/11" is being used to justify the police state. Since the Establishment refuses to tell the public the truth about 9/11, Bush Co. is able to sell the BS that the Patriot Act or domestic spying=safety.

I don't know how it works. I'm almost to the point (of cynicism) where it wouldn't surprise me if the so called black market is simply a ruse to fool people. Meaning, the black market is official US policy but it wouldn't look good to come out and say people might call BS on the Global War on Terror. As I recall some lightbulbs went off when the Dubai ports story hit the press. The issue with that was the's links to Al Qaeda. People starting asking the important question, is the WoT BS or not?

One thing that supports the theory that the black market=US policy is the lack of accountability. Feith, Perle, Edelman, prosecutions just occasional FBI rumblings.

Don said...

If you're running a criminal enterprise, it makes sense to control both sides of the equation.

lukery said...

Noise - it does sound like he is pushing an agenda of sorts - but still...

as for the rest of your analysis - thats pretty much spot-on

Kathleen said...

Read Imperial Hubris by Anonymous, a former CIA Analyst, who says Bin Laden is one of ours. Surprise, surprise.