Hamid Karzai: Our Man in Kabul

With his volatile mix of dependence and independence, Hamid Karzai seems the archetype of all the autocrats Washington has backed in Asia, Africa, and Latin America since European empires began disintegrating after World War II. When the CIA mobilized Afghan warlords to topple the Taliban in October 2001, the country’s capital, Kabul, was ours for the taking — and the giving. In the midst of this chaos, Hamid Karzai, an obscure exile living in Pakistan, gathered a handful of followers and plunged into Afghanistan on a doomed CIA-supported mission to rally the tribes for revolt.  It proved a quixotic effort that required rescue by Navy SEALs who snatched him back to safety in Pakistan.

Desperate for a reliable post-invasion ally, the Bush administration engaged in what one expert has called“bribes, secret deals, and arm twisting” to install Karzai in power.  This process took place not through a democratic election in Kabul, but by lobbying foreign diplomats at a donors’ conference in Bonn, Germany, to appoint him interim president. When King Zahir Shah, a respected figure whose family had ruled Afghanistan for more than 200 years, returned to offer his services as acting head of state, the U.S. ambassador had a “showdown” with the monarch, forcing him back into exile.  In this way, Karzai’s “authority,” which came directly and almost solely from the Bush administration, remained unchecked. For his first months in office, the president had so little trust in his nominal Afghan allies that he was guarded by American security.

In the years that followed, the Karzai regime slid into an ever deepening state of corruption and incompetence, while NATO allies rushed to fill the void with their manpower and material, a de facto endorsement of the president’s low road to power. As billions in international development aid poured into Kabul, a mere trickle escaped the capital’s bottomless bureaucracy to reach impoverished villages in the countryside. In 2009, Transparency International ranked Afghanistan as the world’s second most corrupt nation, just a notch below Somalia.

As opium production soared from 185 tons in 2001 to 8,200 tons just six years later — a remarkable 53% of the country’s entire economy — drug corruption metastasized, reaching provincial governors, the police, cabinet ministers, and the president’s own brother, also his close adviser. Indeed, as a senior U.S. antinarcotics official assigned to Afghanistan described the situation in 2006, “Narco corruption went to the very top of the Afghan government.”  Earlier this year, the U.N. estimated that ordinary Afghans spend $2.5 billion annually, a quarter of the country’s gross domestic product, simply to bribe the police and government officials.  

Last August’s presidential elections were an apt index of the country’s progress. Karzai’s campaign team, the so-called warlord ticket, included Abdul Dostum, an Uzbek warlord who slaughtered countless prisoners in 2001; vice presidential candidate Muhammed Fahim, a former defense minister linked to drugs and human rights abuses; Sher Muhammed Akhundzada, the former governor of Helmand Province, who was caught with nine tons of drugs in his compound back in 2005; and the president’s brother Ahmed Wali Karzai, reputedly the reigning drug lord and family fixer in Kandahar. “The Karzai family has opium and blood on their hands,” one Western intelligence official told the New York Times during the campaign.

Desperate to capture an outright 50% majority in the first round of balloting, Karzai’s warlord coalition made use of an extraordinary array of electoral chicanery. After two months of counting and checking, the U.N.’s Electoral Complaints Commission announced in October 2009 that more than a million of his votes, 28% of his total, were fraudulent, pushing the president’s tally well below the winning margin. Calling the election a “foreseeable train wreck,” the deputy U.N. envoy Peter Galbraith said, “The fraud has handed the Taliban its greatest strategic victory in eight years of fighting the United States and its Afghan partners.”

Galbraith, however, was sacked and silenced as U.S. pressure extinguished the simmering flames of electoral protest.  The runner-up soon withdrew from the run-off election that Washington had favored as a face-saving, post-fraud compromise, and Karzai was declared the outright winner by default. In the wake of the farcical election, Karzai not surprisingly tried to stack the five-man Electoral Complaints Commission, an independent body meant to vet electoral complaints, replacing the three foreign experts with his own Afghan appointees. When the parliament rejected his proposal, Karzai lashed out with bizarre charges, accusing the U.N. of wanting a “puppet government” and blaming all the electoral fraud on “massive interference from foreigners.” In a meeting with members of parliament, he reportedly told them: “If you and the international community pressure me more, I swear that I am going to join the Taliban.”

Amid this tempest in an electoral teapot, as American reinforcements poured into Afghanistan, Washington’s escalating pressure for “reform” only served to inflame Karzai. As Air Force One headed for Kabul on March 28th, National Security Adviser James Jones bluntly told reporters aboard that, in his meeting with Karzai, President Obama would insist that he prioritize “battling corruption, taking the fight to the narco-traffickers.” It was time for the new administration in Washington, ever more deeply committed to its escalating counterinsurgency war in Afghanistan, to bring our man in Kabul back into line.

A week filled with inflammatory, angry outbursts from Karzai followed before the White House changed tack, concluding that it had no alternative to Karzai and began to retreat.  Jones now began telling reporters soothingly that, during his visit to Kabul, President Obama had been “generally impressed with the quality of the [Afghan] ministers and the seriousness with which they’re approaching their job.”

All of this might have seemed so new and bewildering in the American experience, if it weren’t actually so old.  read full article

Advertisements

United States, once again, reserves the right to a “pre-emptive” nuclear attack because it owns the world?

Obama asserts that both “the United States and Israel are very concerned over Iran’s behaviour”, neglecting to mention that while Iran is a party to the NPT and the target of inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Israel has never signed the NPT and possesses a powerful nuclear arsenal that was never subjected to international inspection. And while Iran has no nuclear weapons, Israel keeps about one hundred of them aimed at Iran and other countries in the region.

The same thing can be said about the United States’ other ally, Pakistan, that is the owner of nuclear weapons but has never adhered to the NPT. To the question regarding Pakistan’s nuclear stockpile, on which the United States has so far spent at least 100 million dollars to “secure”, Obama replied “I’m not going to talk about the details of Pakistan’s nuclear”. This confirms that the new nuclear strategy of the United States continues to apply the usual double standard criteria.

These are not the only ambiguities. While, on the one hand, he proclaims the reduction of nuclear weapons, on the other hand, President Obama declares that “we maintain a potent deterrent” and “we invest in improved infrastructure to ensure the safety, security and reliability of our nuclear weapons”. And as he announces the “limitation” on the use of nuclear arms, White House officials are saying that the new strategy allows for “nuclear reprisals against a biological attack”: in other words, against a nonnuclear country accused, possibly on the basis of “evidence” provided by the CIA, of having carried out or attempted to carry out a biological attack against the United States.

Moreover, to the question regarding the new generation of “conventional” weapons that the United States is developing, blurring the boundary between conventional and nuclear weapons, Obama retorted that he didn’t intend to get into details. He adopts the same attitude when it comes to U.S. nuclear arms in Europe. In respect of the anti-missile “shield” that the U.S. intends to deploy in Europe, threatening to compromise the new START treaty, Obama chooses to remain silent. However, one who does speak out – and it’s a cold shower – is Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov who, two days before the Prague Summit, warned that “Moscow reserves the right to withdraw from the new START if the impact of the anti-missile “shield” to be set up by United States significantly outweighs the efficiency of Russia’s nuclear strategic potential” [2].

read article

Obama Threatens Iran with Nuclear Weapons: Tehran’s Response.

Following the US President Barack Obama’s remarks that America will not restrict conditions of using nuclear weapons against Iran and North Korea, Khazaee sent a letter to the presidents of the UN Security Council Yukio Takasu and General Assembly Ali Treki and the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and said threats of the US officials against Iran are inhuman and go against international rules and commitments.

The full text of the letter follows:

The Pedophile Pope and his failing public relations project could be hampered by the Pinocchio syndrome

While the  Rat’s nose grows the Church’s public relations engine failed to dupe the public into falling for the whining Vatican’s, representative of god on earth” claiming similarities with the  six million Jewish victims of the Nazi Holocaust. Not only is Ratzinger known as the Nazi Pope because of his Hitler Youth internship , Jewish leaders are well aware of the Catholic Church’s collaboration with the Nazi death machine and their Holocaust Museum  has documents and photos to prove this. The Church’s apologies for this Nazi collaboration are seen as not only insincere but just another in an unbroken line of cover-ups. Now this failed public relations ploy was not only  stupid but both insensitive and uncaring, it was  also probably expected after the Church’s deception for decades regardingt its unwritten policy to lie about  the organized sexual exploitation of children.  One of the topics not discussed in investigating the RAT’S culpability is in regards to his approving a legion of pedophile fixers.  The documentary, Sex Crimes and the Vatican  interviews  Patrick Wall, a former Benedictine monk who became the Vatican approved enforcer of crimen sollicitationis in his Minnesota diocese.

The Vatican approved a legion of Enforcers of Crimen Sollicitationis.                                                                                                                                                 When a priest was accused of sexual abuse, the abuser was slipped quietly away, and an appointed enforcer of Crimen Sollicitationis was moved in. That is really the ultimate definition of success for the church, when it comes to a case of sexual abuse of a minor, that no one ever finds out about it, that it gets shut down, that it’s kept quiet. If a pay off is needed, or if some kind of a settlement is needed, it’s done. There is no policy to help the victims, there is absolutely no policy to help those who are trying to help the victims, and there is an unwritten policy to lie about the existence of the problem. Then, as far as the perpetrators, the priests, when they’re discovered, the systemic response has been not to investigate and prosecute, but to move them. To move them from one place to another in a secret way, and not reveal why they’re being moved. There is total disregard for the victims, total disregard for the fact that you are going have a whole new crop of victims in the next place -sending priests, who they know have abused children in the past, to new parishes and new communities, and more abuse happens. This is all over the world, the same pattern and practice exists no matter what country you go to.

The  Catholic Church is guilty of engaging in a clear crime against humanity: the organized sexual exploitation of children. Murder, torture and child rape are not new to the Roman Catholic church, nor will these obscenities stop, since the church is above the law and accountable only to itself. And yet, for all its worldly power, the Vatican is tottering under the impact of  the recent media coverage not only of the proof of Vatican complicity but obvious failing attemps to lie and avoid accountability.

Canada: It’s not really about jobs

Richard Sanders writes that If governments were serious about increasing employment, they would invest more in socially-useful, labour-intensive sectors of the economy, not the war industries.

Over the decades, many studies have proved that military spending is among the worst methods ever conceived for putting people to work. Research by the U.S. Institute for Policy Studies, in 2007, found that, for every billion dollars shovelled into war industries, 8,555 jobs are created. This pales in comparison to investments in other industries. For example, 50% more jobs are generated for every billion invested in home construction (12,804) and health care (12,883), while twice as many jobs are created in education (17,687), and 2.3 times as many in mass transit (19,795).

But, besides creating more jobs, investing in social sectors provides much-needed benefits for those who are putting up the cash. So, while grubstaking war industries generates far fewer jobs and provides no social services whatsoever, it also takes a terrifying toll on civilians who comprise 80% of the casualties in modern wars. This creates more enemies and makes us less secure.

As Canadian Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie noted: “Every time you kill an angry young man overseas, you’re creating 15 more who will come after you.” Leslie did not calculate how many enemies are created by killing women and children.

Make no mistake: war is big business. It generates profits not only for war industries, but also for corporations benefiting from regime changes that we force upon other societies. War is indeed about making the world peaceful and secure — not for us, but for the corporations that — while plundering natural and human resources — are running roughshod over the world.

read the article

Pope Ratzinger and the Bushes: Two Peas In a Pedophile Protection Pod

Newsday article from 2005 details the dirtbags, including Neil Bush, who served on Pope Ratzinger’s ‘ecumenical foundation’ — all protected from on ‘High.’ Also in 2005, Pope Rat asked US President [sic] George W. Bush to ‘declare the pontiff immune from liability’ in a lawsuit that accused him of conspiring to cover up the molestation of three boys by a seminarian in Texas. In September 2005, the U.S. asserted that the lawsuit should be dismissed, as the Pope enjoys immunity as head of state of the Holy See . read article

Pope’s Easter Message: continuation of the Catholic Church’s unwritten policy to lie about the organized sexual exploitation of children.

 

Pope’s message? I saw it for what it is- another predictable Catholic distraction to avoid accountability and a continuation of the Catholic Church’s unwritten policy to lie about  the organized sexual exploitation of children.

The Vatican Heirachy, and this so called “Nazi Pope” is head of the modern day papal inquisition, The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. But the fact that the Pope personally shielded child raping priests in his home archbishopric of Munich, and is the author of the Vatican’s standing policy requiring that Bishops conceal evidence of sexual abuse by priests, has made him personally complicit in obstructing justice and engaging in a clear crime against humanity: the organized sexual exploitation of children. He was responsible for creating and enforcing…crimen sollicitationis’ (crime of solicitation) where Catholic

Priests invoked one of the most powerful tenets of the Catholic faith – To bar the vctim (innocent children) or his abuser from ever speaking out. This oath of silence was part of the secret church decree called ‘crimen sollicitationis’ (crime of solicitation). The directive was written in 1962, and Catholic bishops worldwide are ordered to keep it locked away in the church safe. It instructs them on how to deal with priests who solicit sex from the confessional. But it also deals with any obscene external acts with youths of either sex. Child abuse. Originally written in Latin it imposes the strictest oath of secrecy on the child victim, the priest dealing with the allegation, and any witnesses. Breaking that oath means instant banishment from the Catholic Church – excommunication.

 The procedure was intended as a blueprint for cover-ups. The man in charge of enforcing it for 20 years was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Pope . In 2001 he created the successor to the decree. In spirit it was the same, overarching secrecy with a threat of excommunication. He sent a copy to every Bishop in the world. But now he ordered that the Vatican must have what it calls ‘exclusive competence’. In other words, all child abuse allegations must go exclusively to ROME. It is all controlled by the Vatican, and at the top of the Vatican is the Pope.  So Joseph Ratzinger was at the middle of this for most of the years the Crimen was enforced and hee created the successor to the Crimen

The Vatican approved a legion of Enforcers of Crimen Sollicitationis. When a priest was accused of sexual abuse, the abuser was slipped quietly away, and an appointed enforcer of Crimen Sollicitationis was moved in. That is really the ultimate definition of success for the church, when it comes to a case of sexual abuse of a minor, that no one ever finds out about it, that it gets shut down, that it’s kept quiet. If a pay off is needed, or if some kind of a settlement is needed, it’s done. There is no policy to help the victims, there is absolutely no policy to help those who are trying to help the victims, and there is an unwritten policy to lie about the existence of the problem. Then, as far as the perpetrators, the priests, when they’re discovered, the systemic response has been not to investigate and prosecute, but to move them. To move them from one place to another in a secret way, and not reveal why they’re being moved. There is total disregard for the victims, total disregard for the fact that you are going have a whole new crop of victims in the next place -sending priests, who they know have abused children in the past, to new parishes and new communities, and more abuse happens. This is all over the world, the same pattern and practice exists no matter what country you go to.

The  Catholic Church is guilty of engaging in a clear crime against humanity: the organized sexual exploitation of children. Murder, torture and child rape are not new to the Roman Catholic church, nor will these obscenities stop, since the church is above the law and accountable only to itself. And yet, for all its worldly power, the Vatican is tottering under the impact of  the recent media coverage not only of the proof of Vatican complicity but obvious attemps to lie and avoid accountability.

Jesus had a simple remedy for child abusers, if you believe the Bible:

“It would be better if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, rather than that he should harm one of these little ones.” (Luke 17:2)

The solution to all this evil:

1. Tax the churches: Revoke the charitable tax-exempt status of the Roman Catholic Church, nationalize all church property and land, audit and assess all payments owed by these churches to the people and indigenous nations since their inception, and return all lands and effects stolen by these churches from native people.

2. Revoke the legal charters and legislation governing the Roman Catholic, and thereby end their official, legal status.

3. End diplomatic recognition of the Vatican and expel the Papal Nuncio.

4. Separate church and state: no funding for religious schools or churches, no religious oaths or functions connected to the state, no state protection for clergy or churches (ie, revoke sections 176 and 296 of the Criminal Code of Canada).

5. Establish a public, international inquiry into crimes of these churches against all innocent childrenof all ethnic backgroundsespecially native people, including in Indian residential schools, with the power to subpoena, try and jail offenders.

6. Refuse to Cooperate with Genocidal Institutions -Boycott the Catholic Church

7. Refuse to attend their services or rent their facilities, or if you do attend, withhold from them all donations, tithings and bequests. 

8.Hold protests, memorial vigils and civil disobedience actions at these churches

 9.Publicly identify and perform citizens’ arrests on those priests responsible for these crimes 

Thank you Kevin Annett For your research on the Genocidal practices of  the Catholic Church and excuse me for taking liberties with your information.