 | |  |  | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| |
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:08 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| |
Karzai, US and Britain 'impeding Afghan war on drugs'
[Of course they are - that's the idea - to protect and increase poppy production to fuel the drug trade controlled by the elite families, including the Bush's.]
'I totally deny the suggestion that Hamid Karzai is a puppet of the American government. He is free to do anything I tell him ...'
Karzai 'impeding Afghan drug war'
Taleban in opium field in south-west Afghanistan, April 2008 - The Taleban make profits from opium in southern strongholds.
25 July 2008
BBC World News
Afghan President Hamid Karzai is obstructing efforts to tackle his country's drugs problem, a former US counter-narcotics official has said.
Thomas Schweich said Mr Karzai had protected drug lords for political reasons and tolerated "a certain level of corruption" rather than lose power.
He said the former attorney general had told him the president had prevented the prosecution of some 20 officials.
Mr Karzai has denied the claims, saying his government had cut drug production.
"Nobody has done as well as us in the last seven years in the field of counter-narcotics," he told reporters.
The president said his government had eradicated or greatly reduced drug production in more than half of the country's provinces.
But Mr Schweich, who until June was the US state department's co-ordinator for counter-narcotics and justice reform in Afghanistan, said such claims "ignore reality".
"The poppy cultivation right now is up and around 200,000 hectares - that's the biggest narco-crop in history," he told the BBC.
"The fact that it's become concentrated in five or six provinces doesn't change the fact that you have a massive, massive opium problem."
He added: "The attorney general, who was just fired, told me he had a list of 20 corrupt officials who he was not allowed to prosecute."
'Helplessness'
Mr Schweich also echoed claims that Nato and US commanders had been reluctant to get involved in fighting drugs, fearing that destroying farmers' crops would alienate tribesmen in the south and increase support for the insurgents.
Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan's Nangarhar province on 17 July 2008
Mr Karzai has said he plans to run for office again next year
"[Mr Karzai] perceives that there are certain people he cannot crack down on and that it is better to tolerate a certain level of corruption than to take an aggressive stand and lose power," he added.
But Mr Karzai denied his supporters were involved in smuggling.
"I don't blame Afghans for drugs smuggling. They may do it due to helplessness and there may be only a few of them," he said.
In an article in the New York Times Magazine on Sunday, Mr Schweich also accused the US defence department and military commanders from its Nato ally Britain of obstructing attempts to eradicate the opium crop. [Because they're making huge amounts of money from opium and have been for decades. Also, they can get it into the USA and kill off more Americans that way too!]
"Some of our Nato allies have resisted the anti-opium offensive, as has our own Defense Department, which tends to see counter-narcotics as other people's business to be settled once the war-fighting is over," he wrote.
Facing voters
Mr Schweich claimed Britain had urged Mr Karzai to reject a US state department plan to stamp out poppy cultivation.
"Although Britain's foreign office strongly backed anti-narcotics efforts (with the exception of aerial eradication), the British military were even more hostile to the anti-drug mission than the US military," he wrote. The claims come as Mr Karzai prepares to run for another term in office in next year's Afghan presidential elections.
Mr Schweich wrote: "Karzai was playing us like a fiddle. The US would spend billions of dollars on infrastructure development; the US and its allies would fight the Taleban; Karzai's friends could get richer off the drug trade; he could blame the West for his problems; and in 2009 he would be elected to a new term."
The United Nations says that enough opium was produced last year in Afghanistan to make more than 880 tonnes of heroin with a street value of $4bn (£2bn).
A British Foreign Office spokesman said: "Drugs pose a threat to the future of Afghanistan, and the UK is one of the leaders in international efforts to combat the narcotics trade.
"We are committed for the long haul in this challenging endeavour, through a two-pronged approach, to tackle both supply and demand."
A US state department spokesman defended the country's support of President Karzai, saying he was working to help improve the plight of Afghanistan. [Oh sure, like all the other US/UK placed puppets!]
Watch video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_VlUej-Uu8
YouTube - How the war on drugs scam works
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7523285.stm
BBC NEWS | South Asia | Karzai 'impeding Afghan drug war'
Last edited by IAM1 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Five Afghan children killed in US/NATO raids!
US probe disputes civilian deaths in Afghanistan
Sep 2, 2008
By JASON STRAZIUSO
Associated Press Writer
Progress in Afghanistan? Prosperity is only for the elite few in Afghanistan - Watch here:
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_international/kabul/index.html?SITE=AP
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- A U.S. investigation released Tuesday disputed a U.N. report that found "credible evidence" that up to 90 civilians died in a raid on a western Afghan village, saying an after-battle assessment found most of the victims were Taliban fighters.
The military probe found that up to seven civilians and between 30 and 35 Taliban militants were killed in an operation in Azizabad village in the early morning hours of Aug. 22. The U.N. backed a finding by the Afghan government that all the victims were civilians.
The competing claims illustrate the difficulty of determining how many civilians fall victim in a war fought in distant mountains and densely populated villages.
U.S. officials say they face significant challenges both in identifying Taliban fighters, who mix easily with the general population, and because of incentives to falsely claim civilian casualties.
"The enemy knowingly hides behind women and children, they dress in burqas," Maj. Gen. Jeffery J. Schloesser told The Associated Press on Monday. "The enemy makes it extraordinarily difficult to avoid civilian casualties. We don't even know it (civilian casualties occurred) until the fighting is over."
In addition, the U.S. has long said that Taliban militants pressure Afghan villagers to falsely claim civilian casualties, information warfare that does serious damage to the reputations of the U.S., NATO and the Western-backed Afghan government.
In Azizabad and other small villages where civilians are reported killed in combat, the Afghan government and international militaries pay about $2,000 for each person killed, giving villagers incentive to file false claims. U.S. officials acknowledge that payments have been made for people who never existed.
A senior Afghan official close to the Azizabad case said Tuesday he was sure 90 civilians had not perished in the fighting, but he said the Afghan government had already paid claims to villagers. He spoke on condition he was not identified contradicting the official government report.
The official noted that President Hamid Karzai - whose government was quick to publicize the civilian casualties report - is running for president next year, and has reason to be seen standing up to international powers while taking the side of Afghan villagers.
No conclusive evidence has surfaced in the Azizabad case to confirm the death toll.
The U.N. and Afghan reports relied primarily on the word of villagers.
Nek Mohammad Ishaq, a provincial council member in Herat and a member of the Afghan commission, has said photographs and video taken of the victims are with Afghanistan's secretive intelligence service, but no such images have emerged. The U.S. did not make public any video feeds from military aircraft or the forces on the ground.
A member of Afghanistan's investigating commission, Mohammad Iqbal Safi, a member of parliament, said the U.S. report would not change the finding of the Afghans. He said many Afghan households have weapons, but that doesn't make them militants.
"Again I want to emphasize that all the victims were civilians, and there were no Taliban among the dead," Safi said. "All the men killed in the operation were the employees of the private security company working at the coalition base. So how could they be Taliban?"
Ahmad Nader Nadery, the head of Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission, has said that a villager named Reza, whose compound bore the brunt of the attack, had a private security company that worked for the U.S. military at nearby Shindand airport.
Villagers and officials have said the operation was based on faulty information provided by a rival of Reza. Aziz Ahmad Nadem, a member of parliament from Herat, has told the AP that the rival is now being protected by the U.S. military.
Afghan officials say U.S. special forces and Afghan commandos raided the village while hundreds of people were gathered in a large compound for a memorial service honoring a tribal leader, Timor Shah, who was killed eight months ago by the rival, Nader Tawakal. Reza, who was killed in the Aug. 22 operation, is Shah's brother.
The U.S. report released Tuesday said American and Afghan forces took fire from militants while approaching Azizabad, incoming fire that "justified use of well-aimed small-arms fire and close air support to defend the combined force."
The U.S. said its range in casualty numbers was determined by observation of enemy movements during the engagement and on-site observations immediately after the battle. It said a known Taliban commander, Mullah Siddiq, and five to seven civilians were among the dead.
The report said that investigators discovered evidence that the militants planned to attack a nearby coalition base. Evidence collected included weapons, explosives, intelligence materials and an access badge to the base, as well as photographs from inside and outside the base, the report said.
The report said that the investigating officer watched video of the engagement and looked at topographic photo comparisons of the area before and after, including burial sites.
The U.S. report left open the possibility that evidence could emerge to prove that more people died in Azizabad. "No other evidence that may have been collected by other organizations was provided to the U.S. Investigating Officer and therefore could not be considered in the findings," the report said.
Still, U.S. and NATO forces have killed large numbers of civilians in airstrikes.
In early July, a U.S. airstrike hit a group of Afghans walking to a wedding, killing 47 civilians, an Afghan government commission found. The U.S. at first denied hitting any civilians, then later said it regretted any loss of civilian life. The U.S. never publicly admitted its aircraft killed civilians.
The Taliban is no innocent party in the fight. Militants have killed more civilians this year than any U.S. or NATO military action.
An Associated Press tally of death tolls from Western and Afghan officials shows that Taliban attacks like suicide bombings have killed 540 civilians this year. U.S. and NATO military action have killed around 160, excluding Azizabad. Suicide bombs killed more than 100 civilians in Kandahar in February, and more than 60 this summer in an attack on the Indian Embassy.
Karzai ratcheted up pressure on Western militaries after the fighting in Azizabad by ordering a review of whether the U.S. and NATO should be allowed to use airstrikes or carry out raids in villages. Karzai also called for an updated "status of force" agreement between the Afghan government and foreign militaries.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AFGHANISTAN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
theking
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Aug 19, 2008
Posts: 689
Location: Washington, D.C.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2008 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| None of the conspiracy theories you posted on the first 3 pages even survived a year. |
|
_________________
"I fear not for the banning of the book. I fear for the hunger to read the book. Why should one ban a book no one cares to read?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| theking wrote: |
| None of the conspiracy theories you posted on the first 3 pages even survived a year. |
Those were articles of information which showed some of Bush's military tactical lies which promote his deceptive agenda! Bush did conduct and implement a military surge, and more.
So, where's your evidence to support your opinion/claim??? And even if your opinion has any merit, it is now September 2008!
And just so you'll get a clue, the surge didn't and hasn't succeeded, and that's what this threads primary focus has been on/about!   .....The surge! And additionally the accompanying military occupation, Unconstitutional invasion, war profiteering, murder, destruction, control, oil, drugs, and more.
'The "surge" in US forces in Iraq has been presented by the Bush administration as a short term necessity to confront "the terrorists"'
Again, Bush lies presently just as he lied back then too in his 2007 Address!
Also, the surge and military occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan and what has and is occurring there has become a part of this thread. The first article shows how Bush's deceptive "temporary surge" has turned into years now.
'"So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq."' (President Bush's TV address to the Nation, 10 January 2007)
Now Iraq is covered with permanent US military bases and a humongous and permanent US Embassy. There are also Zones, concrete walls, checkpoints, deaths and deformities caused by the US and British use of depleted uranium weapons, etc.
And...Iran has been the topic of the next threatened US/Israeli military invasion for a while now.
Consequences of the Bush "surge"
June 14, 2008
By Dr. Alwood
Analysis reveals that the “surge” was far from ending the quagmire for US imperialism in Iraq, and has qualitatively deepened the crisis. The Bush administration has failed to achieve its stated claim of, fashioning a pro US Iraqi government that is accepted as legitimate by the majority of the Iraqi population. Instead, US policy has undermined the already dysfunctional puppet government in Baghdad and dramatically exacerbated the sectarian and ethnic divisions created within the country.
'The US led Multinational Force in Iraq has conducted a number of attacks on population centers, resulting in many civilian casualties and massive destruction of the urban physical infrastructure. In addition to the two major offensives on Fallujah in 2004, there have also been assaults on other cities and towns including al-Qaim, Tal Afar, Samarra, Najaf and Ramadi, considered by occupation forces as "insurgent strongholds." Attacking forces typically seal off the entire urban area, using siege tactics that are explicitly prohibited under the Geneva Conventions (1949). Such tactics include cutting off water, food and electricity, forcing residents to flee. Those who remain are exposed to heavy air and ground bombardment and “free fire zone” risks. Seizure of medical facilities and interference with provision of medical assistance have also been common in these assaults.'
This is just a sample of what the US invasion and occupation has done to the Iraqi people over the past five years. The country has literally been rendered a wasteland of devastated cities and ruined infrastructure and more. There have been over one million people killed and millions more maimed or traumatized. Over two million have fled the country altogether, while others (over two million) have been turned into internally displaced refugees. The economy has collapsed with unemployment at over 60 percent. "Unemployment in Iraq has been between 60-70 percent over the last two years, according to the government in Baghdad. This is nearly twice what it was in the period of the sanctions in the 1990s." -Feb 21, 2008 (IPS)
Disease and malnutrition are widespread and continue to rise.
The deployment of 30,000 additional troops to Baghdad and the western Iraqi province of Anbar was intended to create a breathing space for political efforts to end the constant guerrilla attacks on US forces, and the murderous civil war between militias linked to the Shiite parties that dominate the US backed Iraqi puppet government and the largely Sunni anti occupation resistance organizations.
So, the Bush administration demanded that the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki offer a number of incentives to the predominantly Sunni ruling stratum that held sway under the previous Baathist regime to join a “national unity” government and use their influence to call off the insurgency.
Maliki was not able to overcome opposition within the Shiite parties to the US dictated measures that amounted to concessions to their Baathist enemies. In fact, the attempts to do so caused a breakup of the Shiite coalition, with the faction loyal to cleric Moqtada al-Sadr walking out of the government.
Far from any “national unity”, the year 2007 witnessed the most extreme elements among Shiites and Sunnis intensifying their sectarian cleansing. They did this by sectarian carnage and largely by completing their agenda of carving out homogeneous power bases in various parts of the country. Serious analysts have concluded that the main reason for the decline in intra Iraqi violence was from the completion of this sectarian cleansing, and NOT the deployment of thousands more US troops.
Neither the US military, nor the Bush administration, has made any attempt to prevent the ethnic cleansing which has taken place. Instead, it has assisted the segregation by throwing up 12-foot concrete walls around Sunni suburbs of Baghdad, transforming the city into a series of sealed off ghettos aka prisons. A resident of one of these ghetto/prisons in the Ghazaliya district, told the Christian Science Monitor earlier this month: “Iraq is a prison and now I live in my own little prison.”
Across the country of Iraq, the US military has pursued a policy of striking deals with whatever militia force or political formation that dominated particular areas. For example, in Baghdad’s densely populated Shiite working class slum of Sadr City. It's there that arrangements have been made with representatives of Moqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia, which is blamed for much of the violence against Sunnis. In return for promising to turn over recalcitrant elements that attack US forces, Sadr’s militia is allowed to openly rule over much of the capital, including areas that it had purged of Sunni inhabitants.
The US military has gone even further in the walled off Sunni enclaves and actually recruited Sunni insurgents and militias into “local citizens’ groups”. Their members are paid over $300 per month for not attacking US troops, while their leaders are allowed to preside like modern day feudal vassals.
The US bribe payments of militias is widespread across the Sunni Triangle in central Iraq. An estimated 192 separate armed groups with over 77,000 fighters have been formed by Sunni tribes and “local citizens’ groups” and the numbers are rising. The Sunni militias have also assisted the US military to hunt down Islamic fundamentalist organizations. Sunni leaders feel it's an opportunity to secure greater political leverage under the US occupation.
Apparently, the US had several motives in enlisting this aid.
The practice began in Anbar province as a desperate attempt to allow the Bush administration to claim that progress was being made in this war. As it has proceeded, Washington has recognized the Sunni militias as a useful counterweight to the Maliki government, under conditions where the US has been preparing for military strikes against neighboring Shiite Iran. In the event of war, anti Shiite and anti Iranian Sunni militias could be used to counter opposition from Iraqi Shiites.
Overall, the result has been a steady sidelining of the Iraqi central government. As a result, the US has sponsored the creation of a myriad of sectarian fiefdoms, with militia warlords holding power and influence through a combination of terror, criminality and mob-like behavior. The militia warlords offer some protection for the poverty stricken and desperate populations. In most areas, the police are generally controlled by the dominant local militia, as is the local government to the extent that it exists, or even functions.
Iraq is currently ranked as the third most corrupt country in the world. For example, it is estimated that $18 billion in Iraqi government funds has been stolen since 2004. More than one third of all US “reconstruction?” funds is simply stolen and ends up in the pockets of various power brokers. While every corner of the country lies in chaos, the mob-like tactics bring about a decline in the number of attacks on US forces, but it hinders every aspect of economic and social activity for the Iraqi people. Basic services are simply not available to many people because they are located in, or supplied from, a rival sectarian area. The US occupation has not only destroyed the economy, but created tremendous political obstacles to any coherent viable reconstruction project.
Despite the media propaganda tool, the overwhelming majority of the Iraqi population is firmly opposed to any US presence in the country! According to a recent ABC/BBC poll, 98 percent of Sunnis and 84 percent of Shiites want all US forces out of the country. Even though attacks on US troops have dropped, they still continue at over 60 per day and are supported (according to the poll) by 93 percent of Sunnis and 50 percent of Shiites!
The idea or conception that Iraq will become a compliant "US client" country/nation is a ludicrous fallacy. And the colonial imperialist military invasion ambition of dominating Iraq’s oil resources and using it as a garrison state in the Middle East for invading Iran can only be accomplished (if at all) by the permanent military occupation of the country! But one must never forget that while the multitude of sectarian militia are hostile to each other, they remain bitterly opposed to the US occupation.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7476 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
IAM1
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 01, 2006
Posts: 5474
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
IMAGE BELOW OF THE WORST PRESIDENT....
A few reasons why Bush is the worst president:
Bush's imperialistic, expansionist ideology and actions which continue to make the US despised by the rest of the world.
The creation of wars based on lies, killing innocents to ensure boom times for the business of war and of those who profit from death.
Approves of and practices torture.
Bush has and continues to violate civil and Constitutional rights, including increased eavesdropping on phone conversations, email and Internet traffic, and travel restrictions.
Bush and his homeland/naziland security chief cracks down on any form of dissent and any thoughts, actions or deeds that defy whatever their interpretation of a particular anti-terrorism law is in vogue on any given day.
Bush makes sure that the interest and benefit of the Zionists always comes before the welfare of the American people.
Perpetuates the damaging economic policies that are destroying the working people and the rest of the world. The number of foreclosures and the hungry and homeless in the US will continue to increase beyond his presidency.
Global elitists will continue to profit and gain while Americans continue to go without healthcare, food, housing, proper education, etc. Bush doesn't and never did care about the American people. He's a sociopathic elitist dictator!
See The Cost Of The War in Iraq:
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
Impeach Bush and Cheney:
http://impeachbush.tv/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| | | | | | | |
| |
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
|  |
Online Stats: 
