As the relationship between the present White House regime and Pakistan continues to deteriorate, some new information has come to light regarding a deal that was made between GWB and Musharraf in 2001 and then reaffirmed in 2008 when Pakistan transitioned from a military junta to a civilian government.
The Guardian is reporting that the deal that was made gave the US unilateral permission to go into Pakistan and strike if they found out where Bin Laden was hiding. This deal was revealed to the Guardian by serving and retired military forces.
Under its terms, Pakistan would allow US forces to conduct a unilateral raid inside Pakistan in search of Bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the al-Qaida No3. Afterwards, both sides agreed, Pakistan would vociferously protest the incursion.
“There was an agreement between Bush and Musharraf that if we knew where Osama was, we were going to come and get him,” said a former senior US official with knowledge of counterterrorism operations. “The Pakistanis would put up a hue and cry, but they wouldn’t stop us.”
The deal puts a new complexion on the political storm triggered by Bin Laden’s death in Abbottabad, 35 miles north of Islamabad, where a team of US navy Seals assaulted his safe house in the early hours of 2 May.
Pakistani officials have insisted they knew nothing of the raid, with military and civilian leaders issuing a strong rebuke to the US. If the US conducts another such assault, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani warned parliament on Monday, “Pakistan reserves the right to retaliate with full force.”
Days earlier, Musharraf, now running an opposition party from exile in London, emerged as one of the most vocal critics of the raid, terming it a “violation of the sovereignty of Pakistan”.
But under the terms of the secret deal, while Pakistanis may not have been informed of the assault, they had agreed to it in principle.
A senior Pakistani official said it had been struck under Musharraf and renewed by the army during the “transition to democracy” – a six-month period from February 2008 when Musharraf was still president but a civilian government had been elected.
Referring to the assault on Bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound, the official added: “As far as our American friends are concerned, they have just implemented the agreement.”
The former US official said the Pakistani protests of the past week were the “public face” of the deal. “We knew they would deny this stuff.”
There are many myths about the late terrorist dog known as Osama bin Laden. Peter Bergen from the New America Foundation attempts to bust some of the most prominent of those myths. (Please note he does not deal with the myth that OBL was already dead):
1. Osama Bin Laden was a product of the CIA. This is a common myth and one of those who has helped this myth gain credence is the Marxist film-maker Michael Moore.
According to Bergen, the facts are: the CIA had no dealings with Afghan Arabs such as Bin Laden during the Russian-Afghanistan war. They dealt with the Pakistan ISI. Bergen cites three source that show that this particular myth is just that, a myth.
2. OBL attacked the US because “of our freedoms”. This was the trope of GWB. However, Peter Bergen notes that in his speeches not once did OBL attack any of those freedoms, but concentrated on Middle East policy. Most of his videos concerned alleged attacks on Muslims (leaving out that the Muslims attacked first of course).
3. Al Qaeda has nothing to do with Islam. Again this was a GWB myth. To the contrary, AQ firmly believed that their attacks have everything to do with Islam. OBL justified his attacks by using the “sword” verses from the Koran.
‘ ”Zawahiri, not bin Laden, is the real brains of al-Qaeda”: The conventional view is that Zawahiri, an Egyptian doctor and al-Qaeda’s longtime second in command, has been bin Laden’s ”brain.” But in making the most important strategic shift in al-Qaeda’s history – identifying the US as its key enemy, rather than Middle Eastern regimes – bin Laden brushed aside Zawahiri’s obsessive focus on overthrowing the Egyptian government. Noman Benotman, a Libyan militant who has spent considerable time talking with both of al-Qaeda’s leaders, told me in an interview that ”Osama influenced Zawahiri with his idea: Forget about the ‘near enemy’; the main enemy is the Americans.”
Bin Laden also kept Zawahiri in the dark for years about al-Qaeda’s most important operation, cluing in his deputy only during 2001.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/the-man-is-dead-now-its-time-to-put-some-of-the-myths-to-rest-20110508-1edzy.html#ixzz1Lq0baidI
One of the clues that the compound in Abbottabad was the home of OBL was that there were no phone line or internet connections. However, think about it for a minute, there are other ways to communicate than through a landline. A satellite dish on the property would have provided the means for the people living in that house to communicate with people all over the world via satellite phone, plus they can use the satellite for an internet connection!! However, the couriers would have been used for security purposes, as well as being the means of providing detailed instructions to AQ combatants.
Now that OBL is dead, there is speculation about who will be his successor. We can always hope that there is a leadership challenge similar to something that we would witness with any mob gang – a la a gang war where people are bumped off. Well, I can dream :).
The Mail Online in the UK lists a number of people who could take over the reins of AQ. Each of them are dangerous individuals running different parts of AQ:
1. Ayman al-Zawahri: an Egyptian who has been AQ second in command (after others were knocked off).
2. Abu Yaha al-Libi (meaning the Libyan). He is the theocratic member of AQ. He escaped from custody and is dangerous. He fought against the Russian troops in Afghanistan.
3. Saif al Adel: Another Egyptian who fought against the Russians in Afghanistan.
4. Anwar al Awlaki – the American born imam now living in Yemen who is associated with both the 9/11 thugs and Nidal Hasan.
5. Saad Bin Laden
6. NASSER AL-WAHAYSHI was the personal secretary of Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Another Yemeni.
There should be no talking of getting out of Afghanistan (sigh) until the task is completed according to the withdrawal time table. The people who have been listed should appear on a most wanted poster. All of them are dangerous. It means that there will be no end to AQ in the near future, but that we must all remain vigilant against this common enemy.
Abdul Haq is an Afghani, probably best described as a warlord. I found this story at Big Peace written by Kerry Patton. It is a story worth reading because Abdul Haw gives some excellent insights.
What rings so very true about Abdul Haq is that he sounds more like the Aghani that existed pre-Russian invasion. Afghanistan was made up of provinces with governors during that pre-Russian invasion period. It was a reasonably secular society whilst still being Islamic. The women were free to wear westernized clothing and they were educated, with many becoming doctors and lawyers. A resistance fighter like Abdul Haq was one who knew how to fight, and was very brave.
Here is a snippet from the article:
Haq: “I knew Osama Bin Laden from the Russian war. He was a coward. I never saw him engage the enemy (the Russians). He was used by many Mujahedeen leaders during the time for his money and international connections. You Americans believe he is the mastermind behind Al Qaeda—he is not. Killing him will not destroy Al Qaeda. If you want to destroy Al Qaeda, you must destroy the Muslim Brotherhood and Bin Laden is not the Brotherhood–Zawahiri is.”
Ayman Al-Zawahiri is the mastermind behind Al Qaeda. He is a known Muslim Brotherhood member. There is no question that Bin Laden was the international figurehead of AQ but truth is, he simply served more as the financier, cheerleader, and social conditioner.
One news report seems to think that the Taliban leadership is set to distance itself completely from Al Qaeda. This might be good news from the point of view that it might be seen as an effort to bring about some form of settlement in Afghanistan.
The Taliban leadership does not seem to be prepared to believe that the U.S. has taken out Osama Bin Laden. I guess that puts them on the same level as some American conspiracy theorists who are making the odd claim that OBL died years ago as a result of failing kidneys, and that the body of OBL had been frozen until now (it is hardly a convincing scenario).
The fact remains that OBL most likely paid for the property and the mansion to be built, and that is how the two couriers were able to look like they could afford to live in the compound. The idea of OBL living in a cave somewhere in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan never really rang true. Also, those who claimed that he was dead prior to last Monday (my time) were never able to provide proof of their assertions. Instead, this news points more and more to the idea that the ISI or the Pakistani military, especially the jihadi elements knew the whereabouts of OBL. On top of that there is an inkling that someone within the Pakistani intelligence community had tipped off OBL when he was in the Tora Bora region that the allies were going to strike.
I have not blogged all that much on other matters within the Pakistan/Afghanistan region, even though I have mentally noted the number of times that NATO trucks have been bombed or attacked by the Taliban. I also note that Pakistan has its own Taliban. Some areas such as Bolochistan have jihadists that have been “disappeared” and whose bodies turn up, indicating that they have been tortured before being killed.
That being said, it really is interesting to note these moves by the Taliban. If they are distancing themselves from Al Qaeda, then there is room for some negotiation. However, they should never be allowed to take over the Afghanistan government again. When they were in charge there was a reign of terror at their hands.
Osama Bin Laden, the face of Al Qaeda is dead. He had been hiding in a compound in Abbottabad since 2005 – unbelievable. The compound was about 100 metres from the military academy. The military and the ISI must have been protecting Osama Bin Laden. The pursuit for this individual appears to be over, but the confirmation is not necessarily completed.
In the meantime, it has been announced that the Egyptian doctor Ayman el-Zawahri has become the new leader of Al Qaeda. What does this mean? First of all, in recent years El-Zawahri has been the brains behind both Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. What this means is that the dangers associated with Al Qaeda have not disappeared with the death of Osama Bin Laden, but they might have increased instead.
This Reuters report is interesting for another reason, as it gives insight into el-Zawahri and his attitude towards Libya:
In the latest monitored by the SITE Intelligence Group last month, he urged Muslims to fight NATO and American forces in Libya.
“I want to direct the attention of our Muslim brothers in Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and the rest of the Muslim countries, that if the Americans and the NATO forces enter Libya then their neighbors in Egypt and Tunisia and Algeria and the rest of the Muslim countries should rise up and fight both the mercenaries of Gaddafi and the rest of NATO,” Zawahri said.
And what exactly does this Egyptian think of Østupid?:
In 2008 el-Zawahri called Østupid a house negro, a racially-charged term used by 1960s black American Muslim leader Malcolm X to describe black slaves loyal to white masters. In 2009 he made the following attack on Østupid:
“America has come with a new deceptive face … It plants the same dagger as Bush and his predecessors did. Obama has resorted to the policies of his predecessors in lying and selling illusions,”
Please read the whole report on this man. It is my view that Zawahri is more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden. I note that he was sentenced to death in absentia in Egypt. I also note that he belonged to the group blamed for the assassination of Anwar Sadat. I also note that he had joined Muslim Brotherhood. I do disagree with the author of the article about MB being non-violent. That is just utter crap.
However, what I see in this report is that Al Qaeda through Zawahri might be seeking a way to intervene in Libya. He might use any NATO boots on the ground as a reason for interference. Now this is conflicting information considering the number of people who actually believe that Al Qaeda is already in Libya. It is not the case, but it is a situation that could get exploited. Zawahri was definitely involved in Iraq, and that begs the question, was Saddam Hussein sheltering him, but not Osama Bin Laden? Also, we do know that some Libyans went to Iraq. What we do not know is how many of them remain alive today. This is a situation that needs to be approached with caution. I doubt that Østupid has the ability to approach with caution.
During the Bush years the world was relatively calm. The invasion of Iraq for example brought the activities of Daffy Duck in Libya under control. In fact Daffy feared that Libya would be the next nation in the firing line unless he changed tack. He was never sincere in changing, it was a ruse. However, I do not know the mind of Mussa Khussa as to whether, he was the architect of making those changes, and giving up some of the WMD arsenal held in Libya was sincere. Mussa Khussa is respected in the intelligence community.
Since the beginning of the Østupid Adminisration the way in which the world perceives the leadership of the USA has been on a downhill slide. This involves not just in military terms but in financial terms as well. There never was a good reason for Østupid to have received that Nobel prize, especially when he had no %^&*()$ idea about foreign policy. On top of that he has no %^&*()$ about economics. His economic policies are an absolute disaster, and I have no doubt that this is making China and India very, very nervous.
In 2009 the opportunities that presented themselves have led to this perception that the White House Administration is full of weak, impotent fools who have the nouse of those who were in the Carter Administration. Carter revisited means that the world is seeing the USA exposed in a way that is unimaginable. One of Carter’s greatest sins was his refusal to deal properly with the Iranian situation when the Shah was ousted. Carter’s attitude paved the way for the return of Khomenei to Iran, and to the imposition of the reign of terror that was unleashed upon the Iranians by the mullahs. Now we are about to see the same thing happen in Egypt, where the army is paving the way for Muslim Brotherhood, backed by Iran to take over government in Egypt. The signs of a bitter conflict to come are already showing. Needless to say it will be the Coptic Christians who will suffer in the long term. I am not underestimating the probable involvement of other shadowy figures who were involved in the Egyptian protests. I am acknowledging that Iran has been a behind the scenes player that has been ignored. Also, I am stating that El-Baradei as President is the worst possible outcome,if that happens.
The Arab spring of protests should be seen as a major concern for the USA in the future. The fact that the oil reserves have been locked up does not bode well for the future in the USA. If Iran gains a major foothold in the Middle East then the oil supplies for Europe and the USA will become choked. It is a very bad thing. There is no way that any of us can second guess who is behind each of the protests. The movement is very fluid in my view, with different groups of people having different aims, but in the background are those who are associated with Iran and also with other shadowy figures. On top of that we still do not know what mischief is being done by Russia and China – both of these countries have been known to assist Iran. Both of these countries refused to back the no-fly zone in Libya and have been critical from the time the action began, even if what they are saying is based upon the propaganda being fed to the LSM by Daffy Duck. Fortunately, the journalists are so p’d off with Daffy over the detentions and the beatings received that they are putting out the truth rather than the official line.
However, there is another front which needs to be watched closely – North Korea. There have been several clashes between North and South Korea, and these have been instigated by North Korea. The perception of weakness in a world leader, such as the usurper in the White House, has given North Korea the opportunity to wage war on South Korea without too much fear of action taken against the country. In the past North Korea has been aided by China and the Soviet Union.
It seems to me that when Østupid pushed for the SALTII treaty he was too willing to agree to the Russian terms because he had absolutely no idea about what it takes to keep the stand-off in a status quo position. That treaty has furthered weakened the USA. No wonder the Russians are being bolder in their own activities. The child with the temper tantrums in the White House does not understand detente. The child does not understand what it takes to maintain equilibrium in the world, thus he has endangered the world to a point that we could be on the brink of a major war.
It is time for Øbama to be fired.
Posted in Afghanistan, Øbama, Østupid, China, Christianity under attack, Egypt, Gaddhafi, George Soros, Iran, Iranian Armageddon, Iraq, Libya, Lockerbie, Moussa Khoussa, North Korea