Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Searching Your Laptop - NYTimes.com

November 15, 2010
The New York Times editorial
Federal courts have long agreed that federal agents guarding the borders do not need a warrant or probable cause to search a traveler’s belongings. That exception to the Fourth Amendment needs updating and tightening to reflect the realities of the digital age.

The government has a sovereign right and responsibility to secure the borders. The recent discovery of two powerful package bombs being shipped to the United States is a reminder of the many dangers out there.

There is also a big difference between government agents scanning items for explosives or looking through a suitcase full of clothing, and searching through the hard drive of a laptop computer containing work papers, financial records, e-mail messages and Web site visits.

Although the number of travelers whose devices are searched is small compared with the many millions who cross American borders each year, the problem is real. Between October 2008 and June 2010, more than 6,600 travelers — nearly 3,000 of them American — were subjected to such searches, according to government records released in response to a Freedom of Information request.

The George W. Bush administration first authorized border agents to seize and view the contents of laptops, smartphones, and other devices and copy and share data with other government agencies without need for any individualized suspicion of wrongdoing.

The Obama administration has tweaked the policy, requiring approval from supervisors to hold a seized device for more than five days, for example. The fundamental flaw remains: it permits the government to engage in indiscriminate and invasive fishing expeditions.

The Supreme Court has yet to confront the issue. But in a disappointing ruling in 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco said that agents at a border need not meet even the low threshold of reasonable suspicion to justify a warrantless laptop search. The ruling reversed a lower court’s finding that laptops are “an extension of our own memory” and too personal to allow government searches without some reasonable and articulable suspicion.

The American Civil Liberties Union has now filed a lawsuit challenging the policy on behalf of press photographers, criminal defense attorneys and a doctoral student in Islamic studies whose laptop was searched and confiscated this spring.

Congress should not wait for resolution of the case. It should approve legislation along the lines of the Travelers’ Privacy Protection Act proposed two years ago in the Senate.

It would have confined border laptop searches involving American citizens and residents to situations where agents have a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity and require a higher standard of probable cause and a warrant or court order when a laptop is held for more than 24 hours. The measure also set strict limits on disclosure and sharing of information from devices seized at the border and requires the Department of Homeland Security to report regularly to Congress and the public on its search policies and practices.

The Senate bill’s leading sponsor, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, was defeated in this month’s election. His three Democratic co-sponsors — Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Ron Wyden of Oregon, and Maria Cantwell of Washington — should press the issue in the new Senate.

The challenge, as ever, is to strike a balance that grants sufficient leeway to protect the nation’s borders without allowing the intimate details of people’s lives and work to be searched, seized and copied on a whim.

Searching Your Laptop - NYTimes.com

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Arundathi Roy exposes the weakling President Obama

Writing for The New York Times, Arundathi Roy exposes the weakling President Obama, who in his haste to sell Boeing plans to India, did not mention even once the human rights violations in Kashmir. Kashmiris, both Pandits and Muslims, are being ill-treated by India and Pakistan. President Obama in the beginning of his presidency expressed desire to take lead in resolving Kashmir dispute. He no longer bears any inclination to do that.

While this is indeed a sign of weakening presidency, I see it as a positive sign for Kashmir. US intervention has seldom delivered peace or justice. Not having US involved in Kashmir is a blessing for all.

Kashmir belongs to Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims. Its future should be charted by the same. India and Pakistan has no business subduing Kashmiris in Srinagar, Baramulla, Chopian, Kargil, Gilgit, and Baltistan.

---

November 8, 2010

Kashmir’s Fruits of Discord

By ARUNDHATI ROY

New Delhi

A WEEK before he was elected in 2008, President Obama said that solving the dispute over Kashmir’s struggle for self-determination — which has led to three wars between India and Pakistan since 1947 — would be among his “critical tasks.” His remarks were greeted with consternation in India, and he has said almost nothing about Kashmir since then.

But on Monday, during his visit here, he pleased his hosts immensely by saying the United States would not intervene in Kashmir and announcing his support for India’s seat on the United Nations Security Council. While he spoke eloquently about threats of terrorism, he kept quiet about human rights abuses in Kashmir.

Whether Mr. Obama decides to change his position on Kashmir again depends on several factors: how the war in Afghanistan is going, how much help the United States needs from Pakistan and whether the government of India goes aircraft shopping this winter. (An order for 10 Boeing C-17 Globemaster III aircraft, worth $5.8 billion, among other huge business deals in the pipeline, may ensure the president’s silence.) But neither Mr. Obama’s silence nor his intervention is likely to make the people in Kashmir drop the stones in their hands.

I was in Kashmir 10 days ago, in that beautiful valley on the Pakistani border, home to three great civilizations — Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist. It’s a valley of myth and history. Some believe that Jesus died there; others that Moses went there to find the lost tribe. Millions worship at the Hazratbal shrine, where a few days a year a hair of the Prophet Muhammad is displayed to believers.

Now Kashmir, caught between the influence of militant Islam from Pakistan and Afghanistan, America’s interests in the region and Indian nationalism (which is becoming increasingly aggressive and “Hinduized”), is considered a nuclear flash point. It is patrolled by more than half a million soldiers and has become the most highly militarized zone in the world.

The atmosphere on the highway between Kashmir’s capital, Srinagar, and my destination, the little apple town of Shopian in the south, was tense. Groups of soldiers were deployed along the highway, in the orchards, in the fields, on the rooftops and outside shops in the little market squares. Despite months of curfew, the “stone pelters” calling for “azadi” (freedom), inspired by the Palestinian intifada, were out again. Some stretches of the highway were covered with so many of these stones that you needed an S.U.V. to drive over them.

Fortunately the friends I was with knew alternative routes down the back lanes and village roads. The “longcut” gave me the time to listen to their stories of this year’s uprising. The youngest, still a boy, told us that when three of his friends were arrested for throwing stones, the police pulled out their fingernails — every nail, on both hands.

For three years in a row now, Kashmiris have been in the streets, protesting what they see as India’s violent occupation. But the militant uprising against the Indian government that began with the support of Pakistan 20 years ago is in retreat. The Indian Army estimates that there are fewer than 500 militants operating in the Kashmir Valley today. The war has left 70,000 dead and tens of thousands debilitated by torture. Many, many thousands have “disappeared.” More than 200,000 Kashmiri Hindus have fled the valley. Though the number of militants has come down, the number of Indian soldiers deployed remains undiminished.

But India’s military domination ought not to be confused with a political victory. Ordinary people armed with nothing but their fury have risen up against the Indian security forces. A whole generation of young people who have grown up in a grid of checkpoints, bunkers, army camps and interrogation centers, whose childhood was spent witnessing “catch and kill” operations, whose imaginations are imbued with spies, informers, “unidentified gunmen,” intelligence operatives and rigged elections, has lost its patience as well as its fear. With an almost mad courage, Kashmir’s young have faced down armed soldiers and taken back their streets.

Since April, when the army killed three civilians and then passed them off as “terrorists,” masked stone throwers, most of them students, have brought life in Kashmir to a grinding halt. The Indian government has retaliated with bullets, curfew and censorship. Just in the last few months, 111 people have been killed, most of them teenagers; more than 3,000 have been wounded and 1,000 arrested.

But still they come out, the young, and throw stones. They don’t seem to have leaders or belong to a political party. They represent themselves. And suddenly the second-largest standing army in the world doesn’t quite know what to do. The Indian government doesn’t know whom to negotiate with. And many Indians are slowly realizing they have been lied to for decades. The once solid consensus on Kashmir suddenly seems a little fragile.

I WAS in a bit of trouble the morning we drove to Shopian. A few days earlier, at a public meeting in Delhi, I said that Kashmir was disputed territory and, contrary to the Indian government’s claims, it couldn’t be called an “integral” part of India. Outraged politicians and news anchors demanded that I be arrested for sedition. The government, terrified of being seen as “soft,” issued threatening statements, and the situation escalated. Day after day, on prime-time news, I was being called a traitor, a white-collar terrorist and several other names reserved for insubordinate women. But sitting in that car on the road to Shopian, listening to my friends, I could not bring myself to regret what I had said in Delhi.

We were on our way to visit a man called Shakeel Ahmed Ahangar. The previous day he had come all the way to Srinagar, where I had been staying, to press me, with an urgency that was hard to ignore, to visit Shopian.

I first met Shakeel in June 2009, only a few weeks after the bodies of Nilofar, his 22-year-old wife, and Asiya, his 17-year-old sister, were found lying a thousand yards apart in a shallow stream in a high-security zone — a floodlit area between army and state police camps. The first postmortem report confirmed rape and murder. But then the system kicked in. New autopsy reports overturned the initial findings and, after the ugly business of exhuming the bodies, rape was ruled out. It was declared that in both cases the cause of death was drowning. Protests shut Shopian down for 47 days, and the valley was convulsed with anger for months. Eventually it looked as though the Indian government had managed to defuse the crisis. But the anger over the killings has magnified the intensity of this year’s uprising.

Shakeel wanted us to visit him in Shopian because he was being threatened by the police for speaking out, and hoped our visit would demonstrate that people even outside of Kashmir were looking out for him, that he was not alone.

It was apple season in Kashmir and as we approached Shopian we could see families in their orchards, busily packing apples into wooden crates in the slanting afternoon light. I worried that a couple of the little red-cheeked children who looked so much like apples themselves might be crated by mistake. The news of our visit had preceded us, and a small knot of people were waiting on the road.

Shakeel’s house is on the edge of the graveyard where his wife and sister are buried. It was dark by the time we arrived, and there was a power failure. We sat in a semicircle around a lantern and listened to him tell the story we all knew so well. Other people entered the room. Other terrible stories poured out, ones that are not in human rights reports, stories about what happens to women who live in remote villages where there are more soldiers than civilians. Shakeel’s young son tumbled around in the darkness, moving from lap to lap. “Soon he’ll be old enough to understand what happened to his mother,” Shakeel said more than once.

Just when we rose to leave, a messenger arrived to say that Shakeel’s father-in-law — Nilofar’s father — was expecting us at his home. We sent our regrets; it was late and if we stayed longer it would be unsafe for us to drive back.

Minutes after we said goodbye and crammed ourselves into the car, a friend’s phone rang. It was a journalist colleague of his with news for me: “The police are typing up the warrant. She’s going to be arrested tonight.” We drove in silence for a while, past truck after truck being loaded with apples. “It’s unlikely,” my friend said finally. “It’s just psy-ops.”

But then, as we picked up speed on the highway, we were overtaken by a car full of men waving us down. Two men on a motorcycle asked our driver to pull over. I steeled myself for what was coming. A man appeared at the car window. He had slanting emerald eyes and a salt-and-pepper beard that went halfway down his chest. He introduced himself as Abdul Hai, father of the murdered Nilofar.

“How could I let you go without your apples?” he said. The bikers started loading two crates of apples into the back of our car. Then Abdul Hai reached into the pockets of his worn brown cloak, and brought out an egg. He placed it in my palm and folded my fingers over it. And then he placed another in my other hand. The eggs were still warm. “God bless and keep you,” he said, and walked away into the dark. What greater reward could a writer want?

I wasn’t arrested that night. Instead, in what is becoming a common political strategy, officials outsourced their displeasure to the mob. A few days after I returned home, the women’s wing of the Bharatiya Janata Party (the right-wing Hindu nationalist opposition) staged a demonstration outside my house, calling for my arrest. Television vans arrived in advance to broadcast the event live. The murderous Bajrang Dal, a militant Hindu group that, in 2002, spearheaded attacks against Muslims in Gujarat in which more than a thousand people were killed, have announced that they are going to “fix” me with all the means at their disposal, including by filing criminal charges against me in different courts across the country.

Indian nationalists and the government seem to believe that they can fortify their idea of a resurgent India with a combination of bullying and Boeing airplanes. But they don’t understand the subversive strength of warm, boiled eggs.

Arundhati Roy is the author of the novel “The God of Small Things” and, most recently, the essay collection “Field Notes on Democracy: Listening to Grasshoppers.”

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

NLC in the dumps

The National Logistics Cell (NLC) was originally created in the mid eighties to carry ammunition from Karachi to the Afghan Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Many a military officers and their families became millionaires because of the military sponsored gravy train.

It turns out that the NLC is now on life support after squandering billions of tax payers money.

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | Kayani tells NLC to stop posing as defence agency

Saturday, October 30, 2010

The Taliban controversy

The news media in North America and Europe has often criticized Pakistan for providing safe havens to the Taliban.  However, those who work on ground know it well that the problem lies at the other side of the Durand Line.

President Karzai does not enjoy much control over Afghanistan beyond his presidential compound in Kabul and therefore any assertion that the government in Kabul enjoys any control over what goes on in Afghanistan beyond a tiny patch of a few square kilometres is absurd.

The following article in the Boston Globe offers that unique perspective on what goes on along the Pakistan and Afghanistan border.

---------------

A different story emerges from Pakistan

H.D.S. Greenway / Oct 29, 2010

KHUR, Pakistan

WHAT CAN we do about Pakistan, you ask, the source of so many troubles for the United States? You wonder: Why can’t or won’t Pakistan eject the Taliban terrorists from their safe havens, or stop them from crossing the border to kill our boys in Afghanistan?

Let me be your guide. If you want to hear a different narrative, come with me for a visit into the so-called “lawless tribal territories’’ on the Northwest Frontier where Pakistan and Afghanistan meet. Here the trouble is that the Americans aren’t stopping the Taliban from crossing over from their safe havens in Afghanistan to attack Pakistan.

Come, you have been invited to lunch at the officers mess of the Bajaur Scouts, gleaming with the regimental silver and leftover traditions from the British who once tried, but never succeeded, in taming the Pashtun tribes. Semi-autonomous tribes traditionally rule themselves rather than be under the direct control of the government.

But first we must drive over the storied Malakand Pass, leaving behind, as Winston Churchill described it, “under the haze of heat’’ the flat lands, up where “the landscape is wild and rugged,’’ and down again into a broad valley like a cup.

“The country of the plains is left … A single step has led from peace to war … and we have we entered a strange land’’ he wrote a century ago, and it still holds true today. For then as now, Pashtun religious zealots, then called Ghazis and now called the Taliban, are making trouble in the tribal territories.

In 2008 they had just about taken over Bajaur on the Afghan border by killing elders, destroying schools, and imposing their strict brand of Islam. The 26th Regiment, and the Scouts, cleared, held, and now they are building. The casualties were heavier than most American units have suffered across the border in Kunar Province.

Unlike the regular army, the Scouts are all Pashtuns themselves. The British formed these frontier Scouts on the theory that it takes a Pashtun to catch a Pashtun. But the Scouts tell us that they had forgotten what their grandfathers and great grandfathers had known, and had to re-learn the guerrilla warfare of which the Taliban are masters.

Today Bajaur is all but pacified, at least for now. The markets are open, people can move freely, teachers are back in their schools. It’s a success story, and that’s why we have been invited here. Don’t be alarmed that we are escorted by pickups full of armed Scouts with machine guns mounted on the cabs. That’s just a precaution. You are not in danger, except, perhaps, “from suicidals,’’ the scouts say, or perhaps a roadside bomb.

Listen to the tribal “elders.’’ They once again represent tribal authority which the Taliban broke down. In town the Scouts have left one of the telephone poles which was refitted to be a gallows by the Taliban. You can see caves that the Taliban dug to hide in — “like the Viet Cong,’’ says one of the Scouts who has read about the tunnels of Cu Chi in Vietnam.

But come and look at this map. Those hatched marks are the bits where Taliban are still active, to be mopped up. There, straddling the border, there’s the weak point! The British drew the border separating members of the same tribe, so the tribesmen have always wandered back and forth at will.

No matter how successful the Scouts and the 26th Regiment have been in clearing out the Taliban from Bajaur, they say the Americans and the Afghan Army in Kunar Province aren’t preventing the Taliban from coming over from their safe havens in Afghanistan. It’s not for lack of will. It’s just the reality of porous borders and frontier fighting.

Whether Pakistan’s national leaders want to keep good relations with some Taliban in other parts of the frontier, as a hedge against when the Americans leave, is a matter above the Scouts’ pay grade. All they know is that Talibs from safe havens in Afghanistan are coming over to kill their boys.

Not quite what you’re hearing back home?

H.D.S. Greenway’s column appears regularly in the Globe.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Robert Fisk: The shaming of America - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent

Robert Fisk, the legendary journalist, puts in context the latest release by Wikileaks, which reveals thousands of civilan deaths that were known to the American forces in Iraq.

Robert Fisk: The shaming of America

As usual, the Arabs knew. They knew all about the mass torture, the promiscuous shooting of civilians, the outrageous use of air power against family homes, the vicious American and British mercenaries, the cemeteries of the innocent dead. All of Iraq knew. Because they were the victims.

Only we could pretend we did not know. Only we in the West could counter every claim, every allegation against the Americans or British with some worthy general – the ghastly US military spokesman Mark Kimmitt and the awful chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Peter Pace, come to mind – to ring-fence us with lies. Find a man who'd been tortured and you'd be told it was terrorist propaganda; discover a house full of children killed by an American air strike and that, too, would be terrorist propaganda, or "collateral damage", or a simple phrase: "We have nothing on that."

Of course, we all knew they always did have something. And yesterday's ocean of military memos proves it yet again. Al-Jazeera has gone to extraordinary lengths to track down the actual Iraqi families whose men and women are recorded as being wasted at US checkpoints – I've identified one because I reported it in 2004, the bullet-smashed car, the two dead journalists, even the name of the local US captain – and it was The Independent on Sunday that first alerted the world to the hordes of indisciplined gunmen being flown to Baghdad to protect diplomats and generals. These mercenaries, who murdered their way around the cities of Iraq, abused me when I told them I was writing about them way back in 2003.

It's always tempting to avoid a story by saying "nothing new". The "old story" idea is used by governments to dampen journalistic interest as it can be used by us to cover journalistic idleness. And it's true that reporters have seen some of this stuff before. The "evidence" of Iranian involvement in bomb-making in southern Iraq was farmed out to The New York Times's Michael Gordon by the Pentagon in February 2007. The raw material, which we can now read, is far more doubtful than the Pentagon-peddled version. Iranian military material was still lying around all over Iraq from the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war and most of the attacks on Americans were at that stage carried out by Sunni insurgents. The reports suggesting that Syria allowed insurgents to pass through their territory, by the way, are correct. I have spoken to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers whose sons made their way to Iraq from Lebanon via the Lebanese village of Majdal Aanjar and then via the northern Syrian city of Aleppo to attack the Americans.

But, written in bleak militarese as it may be, here is the evidence of America's shame. This is material that can be used by lawyers in courts. If 66,081 – I loved the "81" bit – is the highest American figure available for dead civilians, then the real civilian mortality score is infinitely higher since this records only those civilians the Americans knew of. Some of them were brought to the Baghdad mortuary in my presence, and it was the senior official there who told me that the Iraqi ministry of health had banned doctors from performing any post-mortems on dead civilians brought in by American troops. Now why should that be? Because some had been tortured to death by Iraqis working for the Americans? Did this hook up with the 1,300 independent US reports of torture in Iraqi police stations?

The Americans scored no better last time round. In Kuwait, US troops could hear Palestinians being tortured by Kuwaitis in police stations after the liberation of the city from Saddam Hussein's legions in 1991. A member of the Kuwaiti royal family was involved in the torture. US forces did not intervene. They just complained to the royal family. Soldiers are always being told not to intervene. After all, what was Lieutenant Avi Grabovsky of the Israeli army told when he reported to his officer in September 1982 that Israel's Phalangist allies had just murdered some women and children? "We know, it's not to our liking, and don't interfere," Grabovsky was told by his battalion commander. This was during the Sabra and Chatila refugee camp massacre.

The quotation comes from Israel's 1983 Kahan commission report – heaven knows what we could read if WikiLeaks got its hands on the barrels of military files in the Israeli defence ministry (or the Syrian version, for that matter). But, of course, back in those days, we didn't know how to use a computer, let alone how to write on it. And that, of course, is one of the important lessons of the whole WikiLeaks phenomenon.

Back in the First World War or the Second World War or Vietnam, you wrote your military reports on paper. They may have been typed in triplicate but you could number your copies, trace any spy and prevent the leaks. The Pentagon Papers was actually written on paper. You needed to find a mole to get them. But paper could always be destroyed, weeded, trashed, all copies destroyed. At the end of the 1914-18 war, for example, a British second lieutenant shot a Chinese man after Chinese workers had looted a French military train. The Chinese man had pulled a knife on the soldier. But during the 1930s, the British soldier's file was "weeded" three times and so no trace of the incident survives. A faint ghost of it remains only in a regimental war diary which records Chinese involvement in the looting of "French provision trains". The only reason I know of the killing is that my father was the British lieutenant and told me the story before he died. No WikiLeaks then.

But I do suspect this massive hoard of material from the Iraq war has serious implications for journalists as well as armies. What is the future of the Seymour Hershes and the old-style investigative journalism that The Sunday Times used to practise? What is the point of sending teams of reporters to examine war crimes and meet military "deep throats", if almost half a million secret military documents are going to float up in front of you on a screen?

We still haven't got to the bottom of the WikiLeaks story, and I rather suspect that there are more than just a few US soldiers involved in this latest revelation. Who knows if it doesn't go close to the top? In its investigations, for example, al-Jazeera found an extract from a run-of-the-mill Pentagon press conference in November 2005. Peter Pace, the uninspiring chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is briefing journalists on how soldiers should react to the cruel treatment of prisoners, pointing out proudly that an American soldier's duty is to intervene if he sees evidence of torture. Then the camera moves to the far more sinister figure of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who suddenly interrupts – almost in a mutter, and to Pace's consternation – "I don't think you mean they (American soldiers) have an obligation to physically stop it. It's to report it."

The significance of this remark – cryptically sadistic in its way – was lost on the journos, of course. But the secret Frago 242 memo now makes much more sense of the press conference. Presumably sent by General Ricardo Sanchez, this is the instruction that tells soldiers: "Provided the initial report confirms US forces were not involved in the detainee abuse, no further investigation will be conducted unless directed by HHQ [Higher Headquarters]." Abu Ghraib happened under Sanchez's watch in Iraq. It was also Sanchez, by the way, who couldn't explain to me at a press conference why his troops had killed Saddam's sons in a gun battle in Mosul rather than capture them.

So Sanchez's message, it seems, must have had Rumsfeld's imprimatur. And so General David Petraeus – widely loved by the US press corps – was presumably responsible for the dramatic increase in US air strikes over two years; 229 bombing attacks in Iraq in 2006, but 1,447 in 2007. Interestingly enough, US air strikes in Afghanistan have risen by 172 per cent since Petraeus took over there. Which makes it all the more astonishing that the Pentagon is now bleating that WikiLeaks may have blood on its hands. The Pentagon has been covered in blood since the dropping of the atom bomb on Hiroshima in 1945, and for an institution that ordered the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 – wasn't that civilian death toll more than 66,000 by their own count, out of a total of 109,000 recorded? – to claim that WikiLeaks is culpable of homicide is preposterous.

The truth, of course, is that if this vast treasury of secret reports had proved that the body count was much lower than trumpeted by the press, that US soldiers never tolerated Iraqi police torture, rarely shot civilians at checkpoints and always brought killer mercenaries to account, US generals would be handing these files out to journalists free of charge on the steps of the Pentagon. They are furious not because secrecy has been breached, or because blood may be spilt, but because they have been caught out telling the lies we always knew they told.

US official documents detail extraordinary scale of wrongdoing

WikiLeaks yesterday released on its website some 391,832 US military messages documenting actions and reports in Iraq over the period 2004-2009. Here are the main points:

Prisoners abused, raped and murdered

Hundreds of incidents of abuse and torture of prisoners by Iraqi security services, up to and including rape and murder. Since these are itemised in US reports, American authorities now face accusations of failing to investigate them. UN leaders and campaigners are calling for an official investigation.

Civilian death toll cover-up

Coalition leaders have always said "we don't do death tolls", but the documents reveal many deaths were logged. Respected British group Iraq Body Count says that, after preliminary examination of a sample of the documents, there are an estimated 15,000 extra civilian deaths, raising their total to 122,000.

The shooting of men trying to surrender

In February 2007, an Apache helicopter killed two Iraqis, suspected of firing mortars, as they tried to surrender. A military lawyer is quoted as saying: "They cannot surrender to aircraft and are still valid targets."

Private security firm abuses

Britain's Bureau of Investigative Journalism says it found documents detailing new cases of alleged wrongful killings of civilians involving Blackwater, since renamed Xe Services. Despite this, Xe retains extensive US contracts in Afghanistan.

Al-Qa'ida's use of children and "mentally handicapped" for bombing

A teenage boy with Down's syndrome who killed six and injured 34 in a suicide attack in Diyala was said to be an example of an ongoing al-Qa'ida strategy to recruit those with learning difficulties. A doctor is alleged to have sold a list of female patients with learning difficulties to insurgents.

Hundreds of civilians killed at checkpoints

Out of the 832 deaths recorded at checkpoints in Iraq between 2004 and 2009, analysis by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism suggests 681 were civilians. Fifty families were shot at and 30 children killed. Only 120 insurgents were killed in checkpoint incidents.

Iranian influence

Reports detail US concerns that Iranian agents had trained, armed and directed militants in Iraq. In one document, the US military warns a militia commander believed to be behind the deaths of US troops and kidnapping of Iraqi officials was trained by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard.



Robert Fisk: The shaming of America - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent

Sunday, October 24, 2010

tehran times : Seven million still without shelter in Pakistan

"Seven of the 21 million Pakistanis affected by this summer’s floods are still without shelter, the United Nation’s Pakistan Office reported this week. And an estimated 14 million continue to need urgent humanitarian assistance.

These figures are an indictment of the Pakistan ruling elite’s incompetently organized and poorly funded flood relief effort. They also are an indictment of the imperialist powers. Under conditions where Pakistan has faced what the UN has repeatedly described as the world’s largest humanitarian crisis in decades, the agency has repeatedly had to plead for the “international community” to come to assist Pakistan. "

tehran times : Seven million still without shelter in Pakistan

Monday, October 18, 2010

Mumbai spy says he worked for terrorists – then briefed Pakistan | World news | The Guardian

Mumbai spy says he worked for terrorists – then briefed Pakistan | World news | The Guardian

Mumbai spy says he worked for terrorists – then briefed Pakistan

Late in the evening of 26 November 2008, David Headley, a 48-year-old American living in Lahore, received a text from a man he knew as Sajjid, a senior militant in the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba organisation. "Turn on the television," it said.

Headley, a member of the group since 2002, did so and saw footage of carnage in Mumbai. He forwarded the text to another militant. Then he sat down, watched the scenes of mayhem and exchanged emails with his wife.

Headley, of mixed Pakistani and US parentage, had played a central role in preparing the operation he was watching. Over the previous two years, he had made nine trips to India to scout out targets. The tall, pony-tailed, multilingual US graduate was the perfect spy for the militant organisation, particularly after changing his name from Daood Gilani.

On one trip, he had stayed with his Moroccan third wife at the Taj Mahal Palace hotel, where 31 would die. On another he had videoed the Chhatrapati Shivaji train station, where 58 would be gunned down. In April, he had spent five days taking boat trips off Mumbai, bringing back fish for his landlady – and finding the perfect location for the attackers to put ashore before fanning out across the city. On his final trip, in July, he had looked over a Jewish centre, and a cafe popular with tourists.

On his return to Pakistan he had met his militant associates in a safe house and handed them a memory stick with images and photographs of the targets. But this was not the only post-mission debrief the smooth-talking former video shop owner from Philadelphia had. According to the 106-page transcript of Indian investigators' interviews with Headley earlier this year, even before meeting Lashkar-e-Taiba commanders, Headley had sat down with "Major Iqbal", an officer in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), the main military intelligence agency. Nor was this the first meeting with the man he called his handler. Before and after almost every visit to India, Headley told his questioners, he had met Iqbal to receive instructions or brief him.

When on a mission, Headley said, he usually recorded images of potential targets on two memory sticks, one for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the other for the ISI. And one reason that he had been able to avoid detection was because in 2007 Iqbal had trained him in clandestine techniques. The skills learned on the streets of Lahore and put to use in Mumbai, Delhi, Pune and other cities across India only took Headley so far, however. Eleven months after the attacks, now involved in plots for attacks in the west, he was arrested in Chicago on his way back to Pakistan.

Headley's testimony, recorded in 34 hours of interviews with Indian investigators in the presence of FBI officials in June this year, does not just detail relations between the ISI and the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks. It also provides a glimpse of the workings of one of the world's most secretive militant organisations. The attacks, his testimony suggests, grew out of the pressure on commanders of Lashkar-e-Taiba to wage a wider war against the west.

Lashkar-e-Taiba was formed in the early 1990s to send Islamist militants across the de-facto border which separates Indian from Pakistani-controlled Kashmir. Since 2005, Headley says, splinter groups had been breaking away from the group, the biggest militant organisation in Pakistan and the closest to the security establishment. These dissidents were close to radical groups such as al-Qaida or those that were to become the Pakistani Taliban. Senior commanders "had a serious problem holding the LeT [together] and convincing them to [only] fight for Kashmir and against India," Headley told his interrogators. The ISI, he told his interrogators, was equally concerned and under "tremendous pressure to stop the integration of Kashmir-based outfits with Jihadi-based outfits" and hoped "to shift … the theatre of violence from the domestic soil of Pakistan to India".

However, despite detailing close contacts with his handler, the picture that emerges from Headley's interrogation is of a chaotic and complex relationship between the ISI and the militants, with the former not always fully aware of developments. Headley told his questioners that Lieutenant General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the director general of the ISI, visited Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi, the operations chief of LeT, in prison after the attacks in an attempt to "understand" the operation, implying that top level officers were not fully informed. Pasha replaced General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani as head of the ISI just over a year before the attacks. Security sources have told the Guardian that they believe the ISI command lost "ownership" of the operation around that time.

Stephen Tankel, the author of a forthcoming book on LeT, said: "The ISI had more control over the LeT than they admit publicly, but probably less than they'd like to have privately."

The ISI denied any links to the Mumbai attacks yesterday.

Headley told his interrogators that he had formally joined Lashkar-e-Taiba in 2002 after seeing a banner advertising a fundraising drive by the group at the mosque where he prayed, and after attending lectures given by its founder and leader, Hafiz Saeed. Headley's ambition was to fight in Kashmir, and he had military training at camps in north-east and north-west Pakistan.

By January 2006, he had still not been given a combat mission and was feeling demoralised. When detained by the Pakistani police after travelling close to the Afghan border, Headley was interviewed by an ISI officer called "Major Ali" to whom he recounted his involvement in Lashkar-e-Taiba and "ongoing plans to go to India".

He was soon freed and was contacted on his return to Lahore by Major Iqbal. After a two-hour meeting with Iqbal and his immediate superior, a "Lieutenant Colonel Hamza", Headley travelled to America, where he changed his name and then returned to Pakistan where Iqbal arranged for his training.

In June 2006, Headley said, he returned to the US to get an Indian visa and then, in December, having received $25,000 from Iqbal, he travelled to India with the cover story of opening a visa facilitation agency in Mumbai. On his return, he gave a 2GB memory stick containing images of a variety of locations in Mumbai to Iqbal. Headley did not have the impression that any definite plan for attacks yet existed, he told his interrogators. In a safe house, Headley did, however, spend several hours viewing images of potential targets in India with Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi, the LeT military operations chief, before returning to Lahore to continue training with the ISI.

Over the next year, Headley was to make a series of trips to Mumbai.

Tensions within Lashkar-e-Taiba were building, with one senior militant insisting that the group abandon its focus on India and Kashmir for a broader agenda. Lakhvi, the operations chief, argued that the "jihad" in Kashmir was more legitimate and important.

By September 2007, Headley's instructions from "Sajjid", his immediate handler in Lashkar-e-Taiba, were more precise, and he made an extensive study of the entries and exits of the Taj Palace. But the operation still involved only one or two militants who would try to make their escape after their attack, Headley said.

One meeting of four top militants he attended, he remembered, took place in Rawalpindi on the day when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, just a mile or so away. All present expressed their fervent desire that the former prime minister might die of her wounds, he remembered. Hours later, she did.

By the spring of 2008, the plan Headley heard his fellow militants discussing involved "multiple locations and multiple attackers" who would be sent by sea. In April, Headley scouted the landing sites, returning to give the images to Major Iqbal of the ISI and the GPS co-ordinates he had logged to Lashkar-e-Taiba high command.

In June, he was told a new target had been added, another consequence of the fierce internal debate within the group. It was a Jewish centre, the Chabad House.

There was also the Leopold Cafe. The attackers were still supposed to escape after their strike, so Headley said he was told to scout Chhatrapati Shivaji station, from where trains headed north.

By August, after further rows about attacking the Jewish centre, it was decided by Lashkar-e-Taiba commanders that the strike would become a suicide mission and the station became a target, not an escape route.

The training of the 10 attackers was adapted to include indoctrination on martyrdom, Headley said.

On the first attempt, the boat carrying the attackers to Mumbai foundered. On the second, it were nearly discovered by Indian coastguards. On the third, the attackers reached Mumbai, guided by the GPS co-ordinates Headley had provided. Hours later, Headley received the text telling him to turn on the TV.

Headley infiltrated drugs gangs for American authorities in the late 1990s after being jailed for heroin trafficking, and went on after the Mumbai attacks to become involved with a plot by Pakistani militants linked to al-Qaida to attack in Europe. He faces the death sentence. He has agreed to talk to authorities about his previous life in an attempt to avoid the death penalty.
Profiles
David Headley

The 50-year-old militant was born Daood Gilani in Washington to a Pakistani father and an American mother. He attended a prestigious military boarding school in Pakistan but returned to the US, where he was convicted of drug trafficking in 1988 and 1997. In return for a reduced sentence, Gilani became an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration.

He started travelling to Pakistan to develop intelligence on major heroin smugglers, but this also led him into radical Islamist circles and he started to associate with Lashkar-e-Taiba, one of the most active Islamist terrorist groups in south-east Asia. From 2002 Gilani spent at least five stints at its training camps in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, some lasting three months, where he was schooled in ideology, explosives and counter-surveillance.

In 2006 Gilani changed his name to David Headley, ostensibly to disguise his background, and started travelling to India and Pakistan to help plan the November 2008 Mumbai attacks.

He reportedly has three wives – a Pakistan, an American and a Moroccan – two of whom tried to warn US officials of his militant links before the attack. But their warnings went unheeded for reasons that remain unclear.

In early 2009 Lashkar-e-Taiba deployed him to Denmark to plot against a newspaper that published cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. But he was detected by British intelligence and subsequently arrested by the FBI.

US officials describe him as a chameleon-like figure with a knack for deception and skulduggery.

"He's not an Islamic terrorist in the classic sense," one told the Washington Post recently.

General Ashfaq Kayani

The taciturn, chain-smoking Kayani is arguably the most powerful man in Pakistan. Since replacing Pervez Musharraf as army chief in November 2007 he has steadily expanded his authority. Last year he dispatched troops into Swat and South Waziristan to oust the Taliban from their mountain lair; more recently, he helped the US increase drone strikes. The army's budget is up 25%; this summer the prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, granted Kayani an unprecedented three-year extension of tenure. The army was praised for its response to the recent floods.

Yet troubling ambiguities persist. Kayani headed the ISI between 2004 and 2007, a time when the spy agency faced persistent accusations that it was playing a "double game", cracking down on some groups while harbouring others. Kayani insists those ties have been severed but western officials remain sceptical, saying the army's world-view remains India-centric. The army's refusal to disarm "weapons" such as Lashkar-i-Taiba prove this, they say.

Kayani has vowed to pull the army out of politics and close the ISI's notorious "political cell". Yet Kayani himself has swelled into a political figure of import. He recently requested asked President Asif Ali Zardari to purge the most corrupt minister from his bloated cabinet, but persistent rumours of a military coup have proven unfounded – analysts say Kayani doesn't want to wield power directly. At any rate, there is no need. As it overshadows a weak civilian government, the army enjoys unchallenged control over the issues that are closest to every general's heart: policy on Afghanistan, India and the secretive nuclear programme.

Lieutenant General Shuja Pasha

Pasha has controlled the formidable Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency since October 2008. His spies are on the frontline of the fight against Islamist militancy – ISI buildings and employees have been attacked numerous times – yet also face frequent accusations of fostering favoured extremists. Pasha is the embodiment of these contradictions. A short man with a shy smile, he is a fluent German speaker and considered close to his boss, General Kayani. Earlier this year the two travelled to Kabul, offering to help broker Afghan peace talks with the Haqqani militant group. The Punjabi general preaches peace with India – "There will not be a war," he said in 2009 – yet has continued the agency's long-standing support, or at least tolerance, for Lashkar-e-Taiba. Like Kayani, his boots are firmly under the desk: due to retire last March, he was given a one-year extension of tenure.

Hafiz Saeed

As a young university lecturer, Saeed was drawn into the murky world of Islamist militancy during the 1980s "jihad" against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Now he is Pakistan's most notorious Punjabi militant, a pudgy man with a thick beard who operates openly from his Lahore base, addressing rallies and meeting selected journalists. Nominally Saeed heads Jamaat ud Dawa, an Islamist charity, but is widely considered the effective leader of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a fiercely ideological and strictly disciplined group that cut its teeth attacking Indian soldiers in Kashmir in the 1990s. In recent years it has broadened its operations to include attacks on western troops in Afghanistan and western tourists in Mumbai. LeT has long-standing links with the ISI. Saeed was briefly detained in 2002 for his alleged role in an attack on the Indian parliament, and again in 2008 after the Mumbai attacks. In 2009 Interpol issued a "red notice" for his arrest. Profiles by Declan Walsh

Herbal magic - Pakistan media gripped by man marrying twice in one day

A Pakistani man's solution to the age-old dilemma of whether to embark on an arranged or a love marriage has captivated the country's media.

Television channels have provided live coverage of Azhar Haidri's decision to marry both women over a 24-hour period.

At first he refused to marry the woman selected by his family since childhood because he loved someone else...

BBC News - Pakistan media gripped by man marrying twice in one day

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Nobel Peace Prize politicized: Pakistan - GlobalTimes

Pakistan's foreign office expresses its displeasure at the recent choice for the Nobel Peace Prize. The Pakistani foreign office observed: "This decision runs contrary to the established principles for awarding the Prize and, therefore, (distracts) from the prestige associated with this award."

What well-established principles. And why not we hand this task to the officials at Pakistan's foreign office who may pick a military general (serving off course) for the coveted prize. Has any one noticed that not a single senior bureaucrat from Pakistan's foreign service has ever refused to serve a military dictator.

Pakistanis are not alone in their critique. The other global vanguard of human rights, Saudi Arabia, is also up in swords against the decision. However, the Saudi writer has a reasonable argument. He observes: "A look at the list of persons so far honored with the Peace Prize would give the impression that, at times, the committee works as the extension of the US State Department."


Pakistan on Friday questioned the awarding of this year's Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a convicted Chinese criminal.

The Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Friday that it was "surprised and deeply perturbed" to learn about the decision of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, the Nation newspaper reported.

"This decision runs contrary to the established principles for awarding the Prize and, therefore, (distracts) from the prestige associated with this award," the paper quoted the ministry as saying.

"Liu Xiaobo had been sentenced by the Chinese judicial system and has done nothing that could possibly qualify him for the Peace Prize," the ministry said.

The politicization of the Peace Prize, for the purposes of interference in others' domestic affairs, is not only contrary to the principles of inter-nation conduct, but also a negation of the underlying spirit conceived by Alfred Nobel, the founder of the Nobel Prizes, the ministry added.

A political commentator of Russia's RIA Novosti News Agency said in an article that the Nobel Peace Prize has always been extremely politicized, the Xinhua News Agency reported.

"In the past few decades, the committee's sympathies have been with the US-NATO-Western Europe camp," the agency quoted Nikolai Troitsky as saying.

"To prove this, look at the last three Nobel Peace Prize laureates before Liu," the commentator said, referring to US President Barack Obama, Finnish former president Martti Ahtisaari and former US vice president Al Gore.

The Saudi-based Arab News published an article Sunday that expressed explicit opposition to the decision of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, saying it goes against the wishes of Nobel.

"Whatever Liu may be doing, he is not promoting peace," said Muhammad Ismail, the article's writer. "A look at the list of persons so far honored with the Peace Prize would give the impression that, at times, the committee works as the extension of the US State Department."


Nobel Peace Prize politicized: Pakistan - GlobalTimes

DAWN.COM | Metropolitan | Target killings in Karachi claim 30 lives

The killing fields of Karachi. The political violence is consuming the lower middle-class youth in Karachi. This does not bode well for the City or for the country. 30 dead in pre-poll violence suggests Karachi is fast becoming Mogadishu.

DAWN.COM | Metropolitan | Target killings in Karachi claim 30 lives