Reuters story from the Washington Post
By Zeeshan Haider
Saturday, April 17, 2010; 4:34 AM
ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Twin bombings at a center for people displaced by a Pakistani military offensive against militants in the northwest killed at least 20 people on Saturday, said an official.
Local commissioner Khalid Khan Omarzai said a suicide bombing was followed by another explosion near the town of Kohat. "The second one was very devastating," he said.
About 300 people were lined up for registration at the center when the attacks began, officials said.
Pakistan's military has carried out a series of crackdowns against homegrown al Qaeda-backed Taliban fighters seeking to topple the U.S.-backed government.
The military says the latest operations, in the Orakzai and Khyber and Kurram regions, have killed hundreds of militants, casualty tolls that were not possible to confirm independently.
Militants have managed to bounce back despite several army offensives, staging bombings that have raised questions about stability in Pakistan, a crucial ally in Washington's bid to stabilize neighboring Afghanistan.
(Writing by Michael Georgy; editing by Bill Tarrant)
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
US missiles kill four militants in NW Pakistan
Agence France-Presse April 16
By Hasbanullah Khan (AFP)
MIRANSHAH, Pakistan — Missiles fired from US drones targeted a car and a compound in Pakistan's lawless tribal area on the Afghan border Friday, killing at least four militants, security officials said.
The attack struck Tolkhel village in the suburbs of Miranshah, the main town in the restive North Waziristan tribal district bordering Afghanistan.
"At least four militants were killed after US drones fired missiles at a car and a nearby compound used by militants," a senior security official told AFP.
Another security official and a local administration official confirmed the drone attack and the death toll.
"Missiles hit a car carrying militants and as soon as other people rushed into help, more missiles were fired by drones," the official said. "The identity of the militants was not immediately clear."
US forces have been waging a covert drone war against Taliban and Al-Qaeda-linked commanders in the nuclear-armed country's northwestern tribal belt, where militants have carved out havens in mountainous areas outside direct government control.
Washington calls Pakistan's tribal belt the global headquarters of Al-Qaeda and the most dangerous region in the world. Islamist militants in the area are believed to be fuelling the nearly nine-year insurgency in Afghanistan.
North Waziristan is a fortress of Al-Qaeda, Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, and the affiliated Haqqani network set up by Afghan warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani and now effectively run by his ambitious son Sirajuddin.
US officials say drone strikes are a vital weapon in the war to defeat Al-Qaeda and reverse the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, where Washington is leading a major troop surge this year in a bid to end the costly war.
More than 870 people have been killed in more than 90 US strikes in Pakistan since August 2008, with a surge in the past year as President Barack Obama has put Pakistan at the heart of his fight against Al-Qaeda.
Taliban and Al-Qaeda-linked groups have also been blamed for a wave of suicide and bomb attacks that have killed more than 3,200 people across Pakistan since 2007.
Pakistan claims to have made big gains against homegrown Taliban over the past year, following campaigns in the northwestern district of Swat and South Waziristan, but have yet to launch a major campaign in North Waziristan.
By Hasbanullah Khan (AFP)
MIRANSHAH, Pakistan — Missiles fired from US drones targeted a car and a compound in Pakistan's lawless tribal area on the Afghan border Friday, killing at least four militants, security officials said.
The attack struck Tolkhel village in the suburbs of Miranshah, the main town in the restive North Waziristan tribal district bordering Afghanistan.
"At least four militants were killed after US drones fired missiles at a car and a nearby compound used by militants," a senior security official told AFP.
Another security official and a local administration official confirmed the drone attack and the death toll.
"Missiles hit a car carrying militants and as soon as other people rushed into help, more missiles were fired by drones," the official said. "The identity of the militants was not immediately clear."
US forces have been waging a covert drone war against Taliban and Al-Qaeda-linked commanders in the nuclear-armed country's northwestern tribal belt, where militants have carved out havens in mountainous areas outside direct government control.
Washington calls Pakistan's tribal belt the global headquarters of Al-Qaeda and the most dangerous region in the world. Islamist militants in the area are believed to be fuelling the nearly nine-year insurgency in Afghanistan.
North Waziristan is a fortress of Al-Qaeda, Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, and the affiliated Haqqani network set up by Afghan warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani and now effectively run by his ambitious son Sirajuddin.
US officials say drone strikes are a vital weapon in the war to defeat Al-Qaeda and reverse the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, where Washington is leading a major troop surge this year in a bid to end the costly war.
More than 870 people have been killed in more than 90 US strikes in Pakistan since August 2008, with a surge in the past year as President Barack Obama has put Pakistan at the heart of his fight against Al-Qaeda.
Taliban and Al-Qaeda-linked groups have also been blamed for a wave of suicide and bomb attacks that have killed more than 3,200 people across Pakistan since 2007.
Pakistan claims to have made big gains against homegrown Taliban over the past year, following campaigns in the northwestern district of Swat and South Waziristan, but have yet to launch a major campaign in North Waziristan.
White House and extrajudicial assassination policy
A Nation magazine article by the man who drove Blackwater, Inc. to change its business name, Jeremy Scahill. An excerpt appears below.
But first, let's take a look at America in the modern world, and ... in Pakistan. There are ridiculous, bloodthirsty war hawk arguments driven mostly by greed and conquest. And then there are actual concerns of the citizenry, questions people have and assumptions about the way the world works with which they've been raised. And then there's some overlap in between. The overlap is the part of consciousness with which I'm most concerned.
So let's say citizens believe by and large that we live in a modern world of professionals. Where there is a task at hand--whether it's repairing a road, connecting a phone line, advising a family on marriage problems or locating international criminals plotting mass murder in a hidden cell--there are experts who can be hired to attend to the work with the greatest level of skill who necessarily possess an impending desire for society to keep its shape under duress, adherent at all times to a high moral code.
Since the last example in the list is the one we're trying to address here at EE, let's just snap back to the U.S. situation in AfPak, and I'll ask you this: What if you trusted spies right now about as much as you trust bankers? Even if your whole heart belongs to the land of the free, it has to be clear to you the CIA UAV unmanned drone program is not hunting terrorists like a team of former high school football team captains on a network TV show. There is somebody here who doesn't want to do his job and is letting technology do it for him--and a remote controlled drone isn't a Cuisinart. Controlling a rocket-laden aircraft with a video camera and a satellite feed halfway around the world from Langley, Virginia is cowardice. This is not the search for OBL described to us over the last decade. It's been shooting rockets at pregnant women and kids just in case it happens the guy running toward the tool shed with an AK-47 over his back was a top-ten list superterrorist. This is canned tuna work on a caviar budget, and people's lives are being destroyed for it. Their survivors are making plans for which terrorist cells cannot in any sane way be blamed. Americans have jihad of the same order in the very scripts of their most popular westerns and detective stories. His wife and child were murdered in front of him--he would stop at nothing.
Yes, what I am saying here is I believe average folks maintain a sense of justice that exists outside the law. In the same breath I am saying that part of the human psyche where the desire for something as hard to define as justice resides, there exists no rational sense of the limitations and potential detriment caused by the decision to follow that voice of relentless justice.
Flouting international law for a relentless drive for Dirty Harry-style justice is going to cost the rest of law: national law. U.S. law. When individual actors and departments of government declare by their actions that they are above the law, the rest of law is called into question. Why are the rest of us beholden to law--dating back to scripture ("Thou shalt not kill")--and in a modern society where professionals know best (attorneys for example), why is "might makes right" still an argument any citizen should seriously consider? There are other arguments, "democracy comes at a cost," "freedom isn't free," but show us where, exactly to look for the democracy. Residents of "tribal regions" aren't part of this picture of democracy. At home, legislators like Dennis Kucinich who are trying to explain that the ideas in the constitution are important, too--possibly more important than just pushing back against law while the professionals do their spy work and carry out extrajudicial assassinations--aren't really invited to democracy. Their names are taken off the guest list.
Keep in mind those who miss the days of September 12, 2001--the sense of urgency, no measure too drastic or decision too carelessly finalized. If we have time to think, there may be time for democracy. If the citizens involve themselves we may not have to trust the professionals to search their hearts for the clear knell of that high moral code after the "launch" order has been delivered from superiors.
The following excerpt is Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich speaking to the Nation's Jeremy Scahill April 15.
But first, let's take a look at America in the modern world, and ... in Pakistan. There are ridiculous, bloodthirsty war hawk arguments driven mostly by greed and conquest. And then there are actual concerns of the citizenry, questions people have and assumptions about the way the world works with which they've been raised. And then there's some overlap in between. The overlap is the part of consciousness with which I'm most concerned.
So let's say citizens believe by and large that we live in a modern world of professionals. Where there is a task at hand--whether it's repairing a road, connecting a phone line, advising a family on marriage problems or locating international criminals plotting mass murder in a hidden cell--there are experts who can be hired to attend to the work with the greatest level of skill who necessarily possess an impending desire for society to keep its shape under duress, adherent at all times to a high moral code.
Since the last example in the list is the one we're trying to address here at EE, let's just snap back to the U.S. situation in AfPak, and I'll ask you this: What if you trusted spies right now about as much as you trust bankers? Even if your whole heart belongs to the land of the free, it has to be clear to you the CIA UAV unmanned drone program is not hunting terrorists like a team of former high school football team captains on a network TV show. There is somebody here who doesn't want to do his job and is letting technology do it for him--and a remote controlled drone isn't a Cuisinart. Controlling a rocket-laden aircraft with a video camera and a satellite feed halfway around the world from Langley, Virginia is cowardice. This is not the search for OBL described to us over the last decade. It's been shooting rockets at pregnant women and kids just in case it happens the guy running toward the tool shed with an AK-47 over his back was a top-ten list superterrorist. This is canned tuna work on a caviar budget, and people's lives are being destroyed for it. Their survivors are making plans for which terrorist cells cannot in any sane way be blamed. Americans have jihad of the same order in the very scripts of their most popular westerns and detective stories. His wife and child were murdered in front of him--he would stop at nothing.
Yes, what I am saying here is I believe average folks maintain a sense of justice that exists outside the law. In the same breath I am saying that part of the human psyche where the desire for something as hard to define as justice resides, there exists no rational sense of the limitations and potential detriment caused by the decision to follow that voice of relentless justice.
Flouting international law for a relentless drive for Dirty Harry-style justice is going to cost the rest of law: national law. U.S. law. When individual actors and departments of government declare by their actions that they are above the law, the rest of law is called into question. Why are the rest of us beholden to law--dating back to scripture ("Thou shalt not kill")--and in a modern society where professionals know best (attorneys for example), why is "might makes right" still an argument any citizen should seriously consider? There are other arguments, "democracy comes at a cost," "freedom isn't free," but show us where, exactly to look for the democracy. Residents of "tribal regions" aren't part of this picture of democracy. At home, legislators like Dennis Kucinich who are trying to explain that the ideas in the constitution are important, too--possibly more important than just pushing back against law while the professionals do their spy work and carry out extrajudicial assassinations--aren't really invited to democracy. Their names are taken off the guest list.
Keep in mind those who miss the days of September 12, 2001--the sense of urgency, no measure too drastic or decision too carelessly finalized. If we have time to think, there may be time for democracy. If the citizens involve themselves we may not have to trust the professionals to search their hearts for the clear knell of that high moral code after the "launch" order has been delivered from superiors.
The following excerpt is Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich speaking to the Nation's Jeremy Scahill April 15.
"In the real world, things don't work out quite so neatly as they seem to in the heads of the CIA," says Kucinich. "There's always the possibility of blowback, which could endanger high-ranking US officials. There's the inevitable licensing of rogue groups that comes about from policies that are not strictly controlled and that get sloppy--so you have zero accountability. And that's not even to get into an over-arching issue of the morality of assassination policies, which are extra-constitutional, extra-judicial. It's very dangerous from every possible perspective."
He added: "The assassination policies vitiate the presumption of innocence and the government then becomes the investigator, policeman, prosecutor, judge, jury, executioner all in one. That raises the greatest questions with respect to our constitution and our democratic way of life."
Kucinich says the case of al-Awlaki is an attempt to make "a short-cut around the Constitution," saying, "Short-cuts often belie the deep and underlying questions around which nations rise and fall. We are really putting our nation in jeopardy by pursuing this kind of policy."
Thursday, April 15, 2010
For perspective in Pakistan; plus new drone strikes Wednesday night
For review, the situation in Pakistan as told with primary sources by Jeremy Scahill, and this is from February 4 of this year ...
Scahill's piece is still up at thenation.com and is well worth reading.
The Expanding US War in Pakistan
By Jeremy Scahill
February 4, 2010
JSOC stands for Joint Special Operations Command. It's "joint" because it gathers the special forces across the branches of the military.
Meanwhile the conditions on the ground have changed so radically in Pakistan, and most of the public in the United States has little knowledge of military, special forces or spy agency operations there. And as of this morning, we're back to drone strikes ...
Drone strike kills four suspected militants in Pakistan
This report from CNN's Nasir Dawar is set apart from others by the plausibility all four dead might actually be militant combatants. This ought not distract us from the core issue in all things Pakistan-related, who precisely was it who determined the U.S. military would be operating there in any capacity in the first place?
"What we're seeing is the expansion of 'white' Special Operations Forces into Pakistan," says a former member of CENTCOM and US Special Forces with extensive experience in the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater. "As Vietnam, Somalia and the Balkans taught us, that is almost always a precursor to expanded military operations." The former CENTCOM employee spoke to The Nation on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the Pakistan operations. He characterized the US military's role with the Pakistani Frontier Corps as "training in offensive operations," but rejected the idea that at this stage these US trainers would cross the line to engage in direct combat against Taliban forces. That does not mean, he says, that US military forces are not fighting in Pakistan. "Any firefights in Pakistan would be between JSOC forces versus whoever they were chasing," he said. "I would bet my life on that."
Scahill's piece is still up at thenation.com and is well worth reading.
The Expanding US War in Pakistan
By Jeremy Scahill
February 4, 2010
JSOC stands for Joint Special Operations Command. It's "joint" because it gathers the special forces across the branches of the military.
Meanwhile the conditions on the ground have changed so radically in Pakistan, and most of the public in the United States has little knowledge of military, special forces or spy agency operations there. And as of this morning, we're back to drone strikes ...
Drone strike kills four suspected militants in Pakistan
This report from CNN's Nasir Dawar is set apart from others by the plausibility all four dead might actually be militant combatants. This ought not distract us from the core issue in all things Pakistan-related, who precisely was it who determined the U.S. military would be operating there in any capacity in the first place?
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
The Global War on Tribes
This April 13 Counterpunch article addresses a set of issues that has concerned me greatly while following news and analysis of U.S. military and diplomatic involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Something Modernism never fails to do in all its conquests, whether its inoculating against pernicious illnesses, exploring the moon, achieving feats of engineering and architecture or finding a way to dispose of hazardous waste, is to crown itself over all ways of life that appear misaligned in any way with Modernism. Centuries later, the savages are still just that, not because citizens of empire fail to understand other cultures but rather because of the failure of the savage to understand and wholeheartedly embrace the culture of empire. Anywhere I have placed in quotation marks the term 'tribal areas,' Professor Zoltan Grossman explains in detail what my hesitation was in each instance.
The Global War on Tribes
Dr. Zoltan Grossman is a faculty member in Geography and Native American & World Indigenous Peoples Studies at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, currently co-teaching a course on “American Frontiers: Homelands and Empire.”
Once again, the tip for this article has come from Aletho News. The site that, to my thinking, has everything.
The Global War on Tribes
Dr. Zoltan Grossman is a faculty member in Geography and Native American & World Indigenous Peoples Studies at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, currently co-teaching a course on “American Frontiers: Homelands and Empire.”
Once again, the tip for this article has come from Aletho News. The site that, to my thinking, has everything.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Pentagon Releases Names of US Soldiers Killed in Pakistan
Rebel Reports is a high-value information source operated by accomplished journalist and author Jeremy Scahill.
The following entry is dated Feb. 5, 2010
By Jeremy Scahill
Excerpt--The Department of Defense has confirmed what we reported Thursday in The Nation: the US soldiers killed Wednesday in northwest Pakistan were “white” Special Operations Forces (see here for an explanation). I spoke to a knowledgeable US military source today who told me that it is likely that the men were doing precisely what the DoD says they were: training Pakistani security forces from the Frontier Corps for offensive operations in a very dangerous area of the country. All of the men were based out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina and one of them was with the 4th Psychological Operations Group.
The following entry is dated Feb. 5, 2010
By Jeremy Scahill
Excerpt--The Department of Defense has confirmed what we reported Thursday in The Nation: the US soldiers killed Wednesday in northwest Pakistan were “white” Special Operations Forces (see here for an explanation). I spoke to a knowledgeable US military source today who told me that it is likely that the men were doing precisely what the DoD says they were: training Pakistani security forces from the Frontier Corps for offensive operations in a very dangerous area of the country. All of the men were based out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina and one of them was with the 4th Psychological Operations Group.
Ignorance of Afghan Culture Leads to Botched Raids and Civilian Deaths
Counterpunch story dated April 13, 2010
Shooting in the Dark
By GARETH PORTER
Excerpt--A Special Operations Forces raid on Feb. 12 on what was supposed to be the compound of a Taliban leader but that killed three women and two Afghan government officials demonstrated a fatal weakness of the U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan: after eight years of operating there, the U.S. military still has no understanding of the personal, tribal and other local socio-political conflicts.
In targeting the suspected Taliban in such raids, therefore, the U.S. military command has been forced to rely on informants of unknown reliability - and motives.
As a provincial council member from Gardez, near the scene of the botched raid, declared bitterly last week, U.S. Special Forces "don't know who is the enemy and who isn't".
When the commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, Adm. William McRaven, went to the site of the raid to apologise, the head of the extended family which lost five people to the SOF unit, Hajji Sharibuddin, demanded that the U.S. military turn over "the spy who gave the false information to the Americans".
Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and his chief of intelligence, Gen. Michael Flynn, have admitted the profound ignorance of the U.S. military about Afghan society, while avoiding the implications of that ignorance for the issue of false intelligence on the Taliban.
Shooting in the Dark
By GARETH PORTER
Excerpt--A Special Operations Forces raid on Feb. 12 on what was supposed to be the compound of a Taliban leader but that killed three women and two Afghan government officials demonstrated a fatal weakness of the U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan: after eight years of operating there, the U.S. military still has no understanding of the personal, tribal and other local socio-political conflicts.
In targeting the suspected Taliban in such raids, therefore, the U.S. military command has been forced to rely on informants of unknown reliability - and motives.
As a provincial council member from Gardez, near the scene of the botched raid, declared bitterly last week, U.S. Special Forces "don't know who is the enemy and who isn't".
When the commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, Adm. William McRaven, went to the site of the raid to apologise, the head of the extended family which lost five people to the SOF unit, Hajji Sharibuddin, demanded that the U.S. military turn over "the spy who gave the false information to the Americans".
Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and his chief of intelligence, Gen. Michael Flynn, have admitted the profound ignorance of the U.S. military about Afghan society, while avoiding the implications of that ignorance for the issue of false intelligence on the Taliban.
Roadside bomb blasts kill 6 Afghan security forces
Associated Press story (on Yahoo News) provided by radioactivegavin
Tue Apr 13, 8:38 am ET
KABUL – Roadside bombs killed four policemen and two Afghan soldiers, and three women died when mortars fired by suspected insurgents hit their homes in an increasingly volatile area just north of the capital Kabul, officials said Tuesday.
"The attack dealt a fresh blow to U.S. and NATO efforts to win popular support for a coming offensive to drive the Taliban insurgents from what is their spiritual homeland."
Tue Apr 13, 8:38 am ET
KABUL – Roadside bombs killed four policemen and two Afghan soldiers, and three women died when mortars fired by suspected insurgents hit their homes in an increasingly volatile area just north of the capital Kabul, officials said Tuesday.
"The attack dealt a fresh blow to U.S. and NATO efforts to win popular support for a coming offensive to drive the Taliban insurgents from what is their spiritual homeland."
Fourth suspect in NYC bomb plot arrested in Pakistan: Report
Tuesday, April 13 Times of India story
NEW YORK: A fourth suspect in a plot to blow up New York City subways has been caught by Pakistani authorities, according to local media reports.
"I would sacrifice myself to bring attention to what the US military was doing to civilians in Afghanistan by sacrificing my soul for the sake of saving other souls," [Zazi] added.
NEW YORK: A fourth suspect in a plot to blow up New York City subways has been caught by Pakistani authorities, according to local media reports.
"I would sacrifice myself to bring attention to what the US military was doing to civilians in Afghanistan by sacrificing my soul for the sake of saving other souls," [Zazi] added.
The Obama Doctrine: kill, don't detain
Similarities between the work of Obama's legal hawks and those of Bush analyzed by the UK Guardian's Asim Qureshi Sunday.
Article provided by Aletho News
Asim Qureshi guardian.co.uk 11 April 2010
Excerpt: Harold Koh, the legal adviser to the US state department, explained the justifications behind unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) when addressing the American Society of International Law’s annual meeting on 25 March 2010:
“[I]t is the considered view of this administration … that targeting practices, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), comply with all applicable law, including the laws of war … As recent events have shown, al-Qaida has not abandoned its intent to attack the United States, and indeed continues to attack us. Thus, in this ongoing armed conflict, the United States has the authority under international law, and the responsibility to its citizens, to use force, including lethal force, to defend itself, including by targeting persons such as high-level al Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks … [T]his administration has carefully reviewed the rules governing targeting operations to ensure that these operations are conducted consistently with law of war principles …
“[S]ome have argued that the use of lethal force against specific individuals fails to provide adequate process and thus constitutes unlawful extrajudicial killing. But a state that is engaged in armed conflict or in legitimate self-defense is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force. Our procedures and practices for identifying lawful targets are extremely robust, and advanced technologies have helped to make our targeting even more precise. In my experience, the principles of distinction and proportionality that the United States applies are not just recited at meeting. They are implemented rigorously throughout the planning and execution of lethal operations to ensure that such operations are conducted in accordance with all applicable law.”
The legal justifications put forward by Koh are reminiscent of the arguments that were used by John Yoo and others in their bid to lend legitimacy to unlawful practices such as rendition, arbitrary detention and torture. The main cause for concern from Koh’s statements is the implication that protective jurisdiction to which the US feels it is entitled in order to carry out operations anywhere in the world still continues under Obama. The laws of war do not allow for the targeting of individuals outside of the conflict zone, and yet we now find that extrajudicial killings are taking place in countries as far apart as Yemen, the Horn of Africa and Pakistan. From a legal and moral perspective, the rationale provided by the State Department is bankrupt and only reinforces the stereotype that the US has very little concern for its own principles.
Article provided by Aletho News
Asim Qureshi guardian.co.uk 11 April 2010
Excerpt: Harold Koh, the legal adviser to the US state department, explained the justifications behind unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) when addressing the American Society of International Law’s annual meeting on 25 March 2010:
“[I]t is the considered view of this administration … that targeting practices, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), comply with all applicable law, including the laws of war … As recent events have shown, al-Qaida has not abandoned its intent to attack the United States, and indeed continues to attack us. Thus, in this ongoing armed conflict, the United States has the authority under international law, and the responsibility to its citizens, to use force, including lethal force, to defend itself, including by targeting persons such as high-level al Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks … [T]his administration has carefully reviewed the rules governing targeting operations to ensure that these operations are conducted consistently with law of war principles …
“[S]ome have argued that the use of lethal force against specific individuals fails to provide adequate process and thus constitutes unlawful extrajudicial killing. But a state that is engaged in armed conflict or in legitimate self-defense is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force. Our procedures and practices for identifying lawful targets are extremely robust, and advanced technologies have helped to make our targeting even more precise. In my experience, the principles of distinction and proportionality that the United States applies are not just recited at meeting. They are implemented rigorously throughout the planning and execution of lethal operations to ensure that such operations are conducted in accordance with all applicable law.”
The legal justifications put forward by Koh are reminiscent of the arguments that were used by John Yoo and others in their bid to lend legitimacy to unlawful practices such as rendition, arbitrary detention and torture. The main cause for concern from Koh’s statements is the implication that protective jurisdiction to which the US feels it is entitled in order to carry out operations anywhere in the world still continues under Obama. The laws of war do not allow for the targeting of individuals outside of the conflict zone, and yet we now find that extrajudicial killings are taking place in countries as far apart as Yemen, the Horn of Africa and Pakistan. From a legal and moral perspective, the rationale provided by the State Department is bankrupt and only reinforces the stereotype that the US has very little concern for its own principles.
BBC: Pakistan 'army air strike kills dozens of civilians'
Editor's comment (followed by BBC News story):
Tuesday, 13 April 2010 14:37 UK
At least 73 civilians were killed when an army jet bombed a remote village in Pakistan's tribal region of Khyber, a local official has told the BBC.
He said the incident took place on Saturday but news was slow in being reported because of the inaccessibility of the region.
The jet was involved in operations against Taliban militants in the nearby Orakzai tribal region.
Many people have died in air strikes in the area over the past 18 months.
The military insists most of them are militants, but independent sources say many civilians have also been killed.
Villagers say another strike - by a US drone missile - killed 13 people on Monday.
The Pakistani army offensive following a summit with the U.S. state department rages on. As the veil lifts, we are seeing a campaign that targets militants with heavy weaponry, killing a large number of civilians. To think Pakistan's military is operating on a directive from Islamabad not influenced by United States interests is beyond naive. For context, may I please suggest this is like people from Washington D.C. giving orders to carpet bomb the Ozarks because an armed band of abortion clinic bombers lives there.
Furthermore, this might turn out to be Obama and Clinton's answer to the controversy plaguing the CIA armed unmanned drone campaign across the Afghan border: if Pakistan's military murder non-combatant Pakistani citizens ("tribal" citizens, whatever that is intended to mean as we read it over and over), no hearings and probably no investigation. Problem solved! Meanwhile, a new story emerges of another case of an ordinary Pakistani villager joining the Taliban and training to bring explosives to New York. Now are we talking about a resident of the "tribal areas?" The rhetoric reads, no--this one is a militant. I repeat, U.S. efforts in the Middle East are NOT breeding hatred and providing fresh terror campaigns on U.S. soil. So nice that we're clear on this. God is Great ... or rather, ... Bless America!
Tuesday, 13 April 2010 14:37 UK
At least 73 civilians were killed when an army jet bombed a remote village in Pakistan's tribal region of Khyber, a local official has told the BBC.
He said the incident took place on Saturday but news was slow in being reported because of the inaccessibility of the region.
The jet was involved in operations against Taliban militants in the nearby Orakzai tribal region.
Many people have died in air strikes in the area over the past 18 months.
The military insists most of them are militants, but independent sources say many civilians have also been killed.
Villagers say another strike - by a US drone missile - killed 13 people on Monday.
Monday, April 12, 2010
NY Times takes Pakistani army's word for it: 38 Taliban fighters dead
38 Taliban Fighters Said Killed in Pakistan Battle
By SALMAN MASOOD
Published: April 12, 2010
excerpt of first 6 graphs appears below.
By SALMAN MASOOD
Published: April 12, 2010
excerpt of first 6 graphs appears below.
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — At least 38 Taliban fighters and two Pakistani paramilitary soldiers were killed in a gun battle on Monday in northwest Pakistan, military and security officials said.
The firefight occurred when a checkpoint in the Orakzai tribal region came under attack from more than a hundred militants using rockets and mortars, the officials said.
“The clashes started at midnight and continued until early Monday morning,” said Lt. Col. Nadeem Anwar, a spokesperson for the Pakistani Army in Peshawar, the provincial capital. The checkpoint is located in the Shireen Darra area of Orakzai.
“Two F.C. soldiers died,” Colonel Anwar said, referring to the Frontier Corps, the paramilitary force. The militants eventually retreated, he said, adding, “The situation has calmed down and is under control.”
Also Monday, at least five people were killed in violent clashes in Abottabad District over the renaming of North-West Frontier Province.
The police fired tear gas to quell the unrest, which has paralyzed the district in recent days. Last week, a suicide bomber killed 42 people at a ceremony being held to celebrate the renaming.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
The cover-ups that exploded: Alexander Cockburn on Truthout
Truthout.org posted Counterpunch editor Alex Cockburn's piece on the Afghanistan raid that killed pregnant women at a birth ceremony and attempted cover-up and also the helicopter attack on Iraqi civilians and two employees of Reuters News Service in Baghdad in 2007.
Truthout.org article by Counterpunch's Alexander Cockburn
See also the Steven Soldz Znet.org piece, an April 8 post on this site.
Truthout.org article by Counterpunch's Alexander Cockburn
See also the Steven Soldz Znet.org piece, an April 8 post on this site.
From April 7: Pakistan: A new wave of attacks?
Pakistan: A new wave of attacks?
This Al Jazeera story refers to events of last Monday April 5. The story is dated April 7 and is complete with video.
The fascinating part, and this is coming from a news source in Qatar where Middle East events are a little closer to home ...
This Al Jazeera story refers to events of last Monday April 5. The story is dated April 7 and is complete with video.
The fascinating part, and this is coming from a news source in Qatar where Middle East events are a little closer to home ...
"Observers have speculated that the attacks could be in revenge for US drone bombings targeting Taliban fighters in the Swat valley. The unmanned planes that drop bombs and have been criticized for killing civilians. Is Pakistan paying the price for battles waged by the US in the region?"
'Scores dead' in Pakistan air raids
Al Jazeera story on April 10 Pakistan military air strike in Orazkai and Khyber
Media analyst's note: Take a look at the difference in language between the CNN story, which is basically the same story, and the Al Jazeera story. Look for what you might call "certainties" in CNN's story and what you might call "uncertainties" in Al Jazeera. Sure, some Americans think Al Jazeera is the voice of political Islam, but as a news outlet which do you prefer? Journalists who accept there are things that can't be known for sure until investigated further or those who take the liberty to leave the facts at what the official source told them?
Media analyst's note: Take a look at the difference in language between the CNN story, which is basically the same story, and the Al Jazeera story. Look for what you might call "certainties" in CNN's story and what you might call "uncertainties" in Al Jazeera. Sure, some Americans think Al Jazeera is the voice of political Islam, but as a news outlet which do you prefer? Journalists who accept there are things that can't be known for sure until investigated further or those who take the liberty to leave the facts at what the official source told them?
Saturday, April 10, 2010
67 militants killed in Pakistani airstrikes
From CNN ...
67 militants killed in Pakistani airstrikes
Sixty-seven militants were killed Saturday in separate airstrikes in two areas of Pakistan's tribal region, officials tell CNN.
Two Pakistan intelligence officials said about 50 militants were killed in the valley of Tirah of Khyber Agency, one of the seven districts of Pakistan's tribal region bordering Afghanistan.
Officials say a meeting of the militants was under way when shelling from helicopters started. Officials say they received intelligence and then destroyed six militant hideouts.
Officials further informed CNN that in a second wave of air strikes on the hideouts of the militants in Orakzai Agency, 17 militants were killed and three hideouts were destroyed. The officials asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to talk to the media.
This strikes came as the Pakistan military continues its push into tribal areas where both al Qaeda and Taliban operatives are believed to be hiding.
– From journalist Nasir Habib
67 militants killed in Pakistani airstrikes
Sixty-seven militants were killed Saturday in separate airstrikes in two areas of Pakistan's tribal region, officials tell CNN.
Two Pakistan intelligence officials said about 50 militants were killed in the valley of Tirah of Khyber Agency, one of the seven districts of Pakistan's tribal region bordering Afghanistan.
Officials say a meeting of the militants was under way when shelling from helicopters started. Officials say they received intelligence and then destroyed six militant hideouts.
Officials further informed CNN that in a second wave of air strikes on the hideouts of the militants in Orakzai Agency, 17 militants were killed and three hideouts were destroyed. The officials asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to talk to the media.
This strikes came as the Pakistan military continues its push into tribal areas where both al Qaeda and Taliban operatives are believed to be hiding.
– From journalist Nasir Habib
Afghanistan, public consent and propaganda
Glenn Greenwald writes for Salon.com Monday April 5 how murderous operations in Afghanistan complete with Pentagon-cleared cover-up attempts are perpetuated by U.S. and NATO official efforts to intimidate journalists and prevent accurate reporting to the world's media.
How Americans Are Propagandized About Afghanistan
Published on Monday, April 5, 2010 by Salon.com
How Americans Are Propagandized About Afghanistan
by Glenn Greenwald
The original content of this article has been removed from Salon.com as of 3 pm EDT Saturday, April 10.
Excerpt--"Starkey describes the some of the understandable reasons so many reporters do nothing more than regurgitate officials claims: resource constraints, organizations limits, dangers of traveling around, and the 'embed culture.' But he also recounts how NATO tries to intimidate, censor and punish any reporters like him who report adversely on official claims. Illustratively, in response to Starkey's March 13 article detailing what really happened at Paktia and the cover-up that ensued, NATO issued a formal statement naming him and insisting that this article was 'categorically false.' As recently as mid-March, NATO was still claiming -- falsely -- that the women in Paktia were killed prior to the arrival of American troops.
There are some very courageous and intrepid reporters in Afghanistan, including some who work for American media outlets. It was, for instance, a superb and brave investigative report by the NYT's Carlotta Gall in Afghanistan that uncovered what really happened in that air attack Azizabad and documented the Pentagon's false claims. But far more often, Americans are completely misled about events in Afghanistan by the combination of false official claims and mindless stenographic American 'journalism.' And no matter how many times this process is exposed -- from Jessica Lynch's heroic firefight to Pat Tillman's death by Al Qeada -- this propaganda process never diminishes at all."
How Americans Are Propagandized About Afghanistan
Published on Monday, April 5, 2010 by Salon.com
How Americans Are Propagandized About Afghanistan
by Glenn Greenwald
The original content of this article has been removed from Salon.com as of 3 pm EDT Saturday, April 10.
Excerpt--"Starkey describes the some of the understandable reasons so many reporters do nothing more than regurgitate officials claims: resource constraints, organizations limits, dangers of traveling around, and the 'embed culture.' But he also recounts how NATO tries to intimidate, censor and punish any reporters like him who report adversely on official claims. Illustratively, in response to Starkey's March 13 article detailing what really happened at Paktia and the cover-up that ensued, NATO issued a formal statement naming him and insisting that this article was 'categorically false.' As recently as mid-March, NATO was still claiming -- falsely -- that the women in Paktia were killed prior to the arrival of American troops.
There are some very courageous and intrepid reporters in Afghanistan, including some who work for American media outlets. It was, for instance, a superb and brave investigative report by the NYT's Carlotta Gall in Afghanistan that uncovered what really happened in that air attack Azizabad and documented the Pentagon's false claims. But far more often, Americans are completely misled about events in Afghanistan by the combination of false official claims and mindless stenographic American 'journalism.' And no matter how many times this process is exposed -- from Jessica Lynch's heroic firefight to Pat Tillman's death by Al Qeada -- this propaganda process never diminishes at all."
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Bush Sr.'s "No New Vietnam" apparently no promise
The killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan continues to come more vividly to light--as cold-blooded, routine and indifferent murder.
When are we going to stop asking why we went to the countries and start answering the right questions for the new decade: why on earth are we still there and when do we leave?
US Military Covering Up Civilian Killings in Iraq and Afghanistan
ZNet analysis
By Stephen Soldz
When are we going to stop asking why we went to the countries and start answering the right questions for the new decade: why on earth are we still there and when do we leave?
US Military Covering Up Civilian Killings in Iraq and Afghanistan
ZNet analysis
By Stephen Soldz
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Documented human rights abuses of Pakistan's populace by Pakistani military
Human rights report threatens aid to Pakistan
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Foreign Service
Reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
A comment:
See also:
Karzai Threatens to Join the Taliban, as U.S. Involvement in Afghanistan Hits a New Low
The most recent news from Afghanistan shows how deadly and dysfunctional the U.S. mission there is.
Alternet story by Liliana Segura
April 5, 2010
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Foreign Service
Reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
A comment:
Yesterday in these pages, I mentioned the notion of civil war in Pakistan. The term basically describes the situation in Afghanistan of the last nine years with a conspicuous imperial presence armed to the teeth, claiming continuous and impending threat to its homeland and hauling the rest of the international military community (Nato, the UK and a few other national armies) along. Efforts in the pages of mainstream media continue to propagandize the affected area as "AfPak" as though no legal or diplomatic implications exist for U.S. military operations in Pakistan.
If the houses of government in Pakistan--the executive, parliament, the courts--issue military orders to suppress an element in the population that holds some influence over that population, the resulting combat would, or should be, called civil war. When this became an issue in Iraq prior to President Bush's now famous troop surge, the Iraq war lost a great deal of support from the U.S. population.
Previous to the Hillary Clinton meeting with Pakistan's foreign minister and the pledge for billions more in military aid, the U.S. was considering diplomatic talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan. See "A Deal with the Taliban?" New York Review of Books Feb. 25, 2010; piece by Ahmed Rashid, pages 36-9. This refers to an entity separate from but intricately influenced by the Taliban in Pakistan. Both can be dissuaded from affinity with Al Qaeda, a much smaller group that leverages against state governments in Kabul and Islamabad for religious political influence within the Taliban and the larger populations.
It is arguable that negotiations that were a looming possibility in February may be rendered impossible or pushed back many months by the backlash of recent moves by Departments of State and Defense with leadership in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
See also:
Karzai Threatens to Join the Taliban, as U.S. Involvement in Afghanistan Hits a New Low
The most recent news from Afghanistan shows how deadly and dysfunctional the U.S. mission there is.
Alternet story by Liliana Segura
April 5, 2010
Monday, April 5, 2010
U.S. Consulate in Pakistan bombed
Voice of America reported a breaking story Monday after explosions rocked the U.S. Consulate in Peshawar, Pakistan.
Point of concern: no by-line here, typical fashion of late-breaking news reporting, and what we see is information available about the group claiming responsibility for the attack: the Pakistani Taliban, not a very specific group but a sprawling cross section of Pakistan's population. Taken with recent reports of Pakistan's military mounting a successful campaign against Islamic militants within its borders, the situation is coming closer to what could be (and possibly ought to be) described as civil war. This would be a civil war in which the United States and its military and spy operatives are taking a clear side. Where is the civic deliberation in this matter? If somewhere in DC, then where (hopefully on Capitol Hill before Langley) What's the democratic aspect of fanning the flames of civil war in Pakistan in attempts to bring democracy to Afghanistan?
US Condemns Attack on Consulate in Pakistan
Point of concern: no by-line here, typical fashion of late-breaking news reporting, and what we see is information available about the group claiming responsibility for the attack: the Pakistani Taliban, not a very specific group but a sprawling cross section of Pakistan's population. Taken with recent reports of Pakistan's military mounting a successful campaign against Islamic militants within its borders, the situation is coming closer to what could be (and possibly ought to be) described as civil war. This would be a civil war in which the United States and its military and spy operatives are taking a clear side. Where is the civic deliberation in this matter? If somewhere in DC, then where (hopefully on Capitol Hill before Langley) What's the democratic aspect of fanning the flames of civil war in Pakistan in attempts to bring democracy to Afghanistan?
US Condemns Attack on Consulate in Pakistan
The United States has condemned an Islamic militant attack on the U.S. consulate in the Pakistani city of Peshawar Monday.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the White House is greatly concerned by attack that left at least three people dead and several others wounded.
Pakistani Taliban militants have claimed responsibility for the attack. Security officials say militants detonated car bombs outside the consulate and fired grenades and other weapons as they tried to enter the building. Police quickly closed off the area.
A statement from the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad says at least two Pakistani security officers were killed. There are no reports that any U.S. citizens were among those wounded or killed in the attack.
Earlier Monday, authorities say a suspected suicide bomber killed at least 41 people and wounded scores of others at a political rally in the Lower Dir district.
The Awami National Party (ANP), which heads the ruling coalition in North West Frontier Province, was meeting to discuss a name change for the province.
The ANP has supported military operations against the Taliban and Islamist militants in the country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)