Israel denies it’s nuclear arsenal (18:59), quickly backtracks and then in a moment of clarity the truth accidently slips out: “we (Israel) are the problem… no… we are the solution, not the problem.”

 

Armed millitants detonated a car bomb outside Pakistan’s spy agency (ISI) offices today, killing 30 and wounding over 250 others.

 

The attack is speculated to be retaliation for the governments military action against the Taliban in the Federally Administered Tribal Agencies:

 

Associated Press: At least four men with rifles stepped from the car and opened fire on the intelligence agency building, then set off a massive blast when security guards returned fire, officials said.

 

Raja Riaz, a senior minister in the Punjab provincial government, told reporters that about 30 people were killed. Sajjad Bhutta, another senior government official, told reporters more than 250 people were injured.

 

The explosion sheared the walls off buildings in a main business district. The ceilings of operating rooms in a nearby hospital collapsed, injuring 20 people. TV footage showed bleeding bystanders and emergency workers carrying the injured toward ambulances. Rescuers rushed to free officers buried in the rubble.

 

“The moment the blast happened, everything went dark in front of my eyes,” witness Muhammad Ali said. “The way the blast happened, then gunfire, it looked as if there was a battle going on.”

Israeli citizens can sleep in safety now that the one year old baby, Fahd Louai Shuqair, has been placed under house arrest.

 

Israeli authourities arrested the infant claiming that because he was born in Damascus he must be a terrorist. Nice one Israel, yet another human rights abuse to add to your collection.

 

The Oxford online dictionary defines a terrorist as “a person who uses violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.”  It’s hard to imagine a one year old infant using violence and intimidation to pursue a political agenda now isnt it? Remind me again who the terrorists are? 

 

SYRIA TODAY: Israeli authorities have put a one-year-old baby, Fahd Louai Shuqair, under house arrest for two years because he was born in Damascus, local media reported last month.

 

Shuqair’s parents, who were studying at the University of Damascus at the time of his birth, recently moved back to their village in the Israeli-occupied Golan, only to be informed by authorities that their baby was being put under house arrest.

 

The baby’s uncle, Ihsan Shuqair, said the family had expected some harassment from Israeli authorities, but the house arrest “exceeded all expectations”. He said the baby is now unable to visit a doctor or accompany his mother to see relatives.

 

“The Israeli occupation forces’ excuse is that the baby is a terrorist because he was born in Damascus,” Shuqair said.

“The Explorers Program” is an affiliate of the Boy Scouts of America, a one time fun, educational program for childern. But learning how to tie knots and earn first aid badges are a thing of the past, as new millitant training camps are now all the rage. The Explorers Program are training thousands of their young members, some as young as 13 years old,  in counter terrorism tactics and illegal immigrant border control.  

 

So what is the difference between African child soldiers, and the new breed coming out of America? The Taliban train young boys in camps, as do numerous other groups of millitant fanatics. The only difference is that one is condemned, and one is condoned. If the US do it, then hey, whats the problem? It’s for freedom and democrisy right?! But perish the thought of anyone else being caught in the act! You have to love the blatent hypocrisy from our buddies in the US-of-A:

 

 

New York Times: “This is about being a true-blooded American guy and girl,” said A. J. Lowenthal, a sheriff’s deputy here in Imperial County, whose life clock, he says, is set around the Explorers events he helps run. “It fits right in with the honor and bravery of the Boy Scouts.”

 

The training, which leaders say is not intended to be applied outside the simulated Explorer setting, can involve chasing down illegal border crossers as well as more dangerous situations that include facing down terrorists and taking out “active shooters,” like those who bring gunfire and death to college campuses. In a simulation here of a raid on a marijuana field, several Explorers were instructed on how to quiet an obstreperous lookout.

 

“Put him on his face and put a knee in his back,” a Border Patrol agent explained. “I guarantee that he’ll shut up.”

 

One participant, Felix Arce, 16, said he liked “the discipline of the program,” which was something he said his life was lacking. “I want to be a lawyer, and this teaches you about how crimes are committed,” he said.

 

Cathy Noriego, also 16, said she was attracted by the guns. The group uses compressed-air guns — known as airsoft guns, which fire tiny plastic pellets — in the training exercises, and sometimes they shoot real guns on a closed range.

 

“I like shooting them,” Cathy said. “I like the sound they make. It gets me excited.”

 

In a competition in Arizona that he did not oversee, Deputy Lowenthal said, one role-player wore traditional Arab dress. “If we’re looking at 9/11 and what a Middle Eastern terrorist would be like,” he said, “then maybe your role-player would look like that. I don’t know, would you call that politically incorrect?”

My following article was published today in Online Opinion, Australia’s leading journal for social and political debate:

 

Whilst the US led war on terror persists with frantic fervour; the Iranian and Trans-Afghan pipelines become the new target in a proxy war for power. Writes Reuben Brand  

 

Oil, as history tells us, equals bad news for those who have it, or in this case those who have a transport route for it.

 

The US have had the blueprints for the Trans-Afghan pipeline since the mid 1990’s and have thus far kept them successfully out of the spotlight. The major thorn in the side of this black gold Silk Road is to secure complete control of the region, a plan that proves to be increasingly problematic for the new Obama Administration.

 

Pakistan is the doorway to Asia and holds the keys to the Middle East, so it comes as no surprise that the current instability in the region serves to bode well for those with ulterior motives.

 

The last time I was in Peshawar, the largest city in the North West Frontier Province - roughly 60 km’s from the Afghan border, anti US sentiment was running thick on the ground and the tension in the region was palpable.

 

Not much has changed - And why should it? Pakistan is now, more than ever, in the crosshairs of the US led “war on terror.”

 

In a desperate bid to win the never ending “war on terror,” the US has increased asymmetric incursions and drone attacks into Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas. These continuous covert operations leave very few options on the table for the now flailing Pakistani government and highlight the geopolitical importance of Pakistan and current US intentions in the region. Control.

 

So what does Pakistan have that the US so desperately want? Nuclear weapons, an oil route and apparently Osama Bin Laden. Iraq only had one, Iran supposedly has one, but Pakistan has got the trifecta - the undisputed sweepstake winner.

 

The proposed Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (IPI) is the proverbial fly in the ointment for the US oil express. The IPI will run through some of the most dangerous regions in the world and could be heading straight into China. These pipes of regional integration have the potential to increase the now unstable diplomatic ties between the neighbouring countries and turn Pakistan into an energy hub. A connection and shift in power that terrifies the United States.

 

The Trans-Afghan pipeline is the coveted contract that Halliburton, Dick Cheney’s company, seized with the help of the Unocal Corporation in the mid 1990’s. The obvious problems standing between the US and the rich oil and natural gas reserves of the Caspian Basin is a safe transport route and no competition; namely the IPI pipeline, dubbed the “peace pipeline.”

 

In an address to the US Congress in1998, the vice president for international relations of Unocal, John Maresca, said that the major problem with the Trans-Afghan pipeline was “how to get the vast energy resources to the markets where they were needed. Central Asia is isolated. Their natural resources are land locked, both geographically and politically.”

 

“The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges - we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company,” said Maresca.

 

In the post 9/11 scenario, Afghanistan has been invaded and politically deposed. Hamid Karzai was installed as the new President and quickly signed a trade agreement with neighbouring countries to secure the Trans-Afghan pipeline. Not surprisingly, before his installation, Karzai worked as a consultant for Unocal.

 

Agha Riaz ul Islam, a respected and senior member of the Pakistan Peoples Party, said there are two oil pipelines of interest to the US. One of which will go through Georgia, Turkey and Europe, the other from Tashkent, Samarkand, Uzbekistan to Afghanistan and into the North West Frontier Provence (NWFP) of Pakistan to the sea port at Gawadar.

 

The US knows it must secure an agreement with either the government or the tribal leaders of the NWFP for their pipeline. But according to Riaz ul Islam, the US and NATO, under the pretext of Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, are attempting to invade the border region where the pipeline will cross and secure control by force through the tribal chiefs.

 

Riaz ul Islam said the US wants to capture complete political control of Afghanistan, Waziristan and the entire oil route to Gawadar for their own security.

 

“They already have control in Afghanistan physically, although the Taliban have their own governments in each of the provinces. The NATO general in Afghanistan is advising the US that it is possible to have a political settlement with Mullah Omar, the leader of the Taliban - then they could have complete control of Afghanistan,” he said.

 

Riaz ul Islam is a champion for freedom and democracy in Pakistan and is renowned for speaking out against government corruption and oppression, a title that has landed him in jail on numerous occasions under the previous two dictatorships. “If the US thinks that Mullah Omar can service their political benefit, then they have no problem in talking to him, even if he is a fundamentalist, but if he does not agree with them, they will portray him as a terrorist leader in front of the whole international community.”

 

The US are giving money, support and ammunition to some of the Afghanis and sending them into Pakistan to sabotage any good relations, said Riaz ul Islam. In an attempt to gain continued support from the international community, the US propagate the idea that the Taliban, fundamentalists and suicide bombers are the real problem behind the ongoing conflicts.

 

“The US is promoting lawlessness in these areas. They are trying to justify their presence by saying that these areas need their forces on the ground to control the situation - trying to get international permission. They are violating the integrity of the international community to get inside this area to protect their own interests; their oil business and finances. They are presenting their case to the world as if Al Qaeda is the global problem.”

 

As a result of the US presence in the region and in other parts of the world, the 160 million Pakistanis and the entire Muslim community have been portrayed as being anti European and US. An impression that Riaz ul Islam says is not true. “They are against the policies of these countries, not the people.”

 

Riaz ul Islam said his fellow country people are concerned about the continued foreign intervention and ask why the US is in the region, and the rest of the world, trying to solve small problems that can be resolved by the local people. “The US and NATO forces have left their own countries and are now violating the world’s original laws,” he said.

 

“Why are they in Darfur, Iraq, Georgia, and Afghanistan? How can they possibly think that Osama Bin Laden is somewhere in the wilderness here and can invade the US from 2500miles away? Even if he rides on a donkey, it will take him two months to reach Rawalpindi. If Pakistan cannot fight against the US and NATO with their own air force, navy and nuclear weapons how do they think Al Qaeda can fight on donkey? It is a stupid idea that the US are spreading whilst initiating instability throughout the world.”

 

Riaz ul Islam does not foresee any solution coming out of continued conflict in the border region for control over natural resources and calls for a democratic resolution without bloodshed. “Basically there is only one way. And that is politically. Militarily there is no possibility of settling it.”

 

An interview with Noam Chomsky on Russia Today, highlighting Obama’s “change,” or lack thereof when it comes to Bush’s rhetoric and Middle East policies:

 

FAIR, (Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting) has released a report dealing with the current US attack on civillians in Afghanistan. It all seemed to be going so well, until yet again, US forces decided to kill more innocent civillians. Good luck trying to put a good spin on this PR nighmare Obama:

 

Early reports of a massive U.S. attack on civilians in western Afghanistan last week (5/5/09) hewed to a familiar corporate media formula, stressing official U.S. denials and framing the scores of dead civilians as a PR setback for the White House’s war effort.

 

Scanning the headlines gave a sense of the media’s view of the tragedy: “Civilian Deaths Imperil Support for Afghan War” (New York Times, 5/7/09), “Claim of Afghan Civilian Deaths Clouds U.S. Talks” (Wall Street Journal, 5/7/09), “Afghan Civilian Deaths Present U.S. With Strategic Problem” (Washington Post, 5/8/09).

 

As is frequently the case with such incidents (Extra! Update, 8/07), the primary fallout would seem to be the damage done to U.S. goals. The New York Times reported that civilian deaths “have been a decisive factor in souring many Afghans on the war.” As CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric put it (5/6/09), “Reports of these civilian casualties could not have come at a worse time, as the Obama administration launches its new strategy to eradicate the Taliban and convince the Afghan people to support those efforts.” Other outlets used very similar language to explain why the timing was “particularly sensitive” (Washington Post, 5/7/09) or “awkward” (Associated Press, 5/7/09) for the Obama administration.

 

While it is important to be cautious about early reports of such atrocities, many accounts played up U.S. denials. Some anonymous U.S. military officials vigorously denied that they were responsible, instead blaming the deaths on Taliban grenades and use of “human shields.”

US snipers have been placing various items on the side of the road and waiting until an Iraqi, any Iraqi (the US doesn’t discriminate when it comes to killing), picks it up. The sniper then shoots them. Would you pick up a curious looking bundle of goods if you new it meant getting your head blown off?