UPDATED: CIA's "Family Jewels" Raise Concerns About Civil Liberties

Today's release of some, still censored CIA illegal operations, began a discussion on NPR's radio show "To the Point", with Warren Olney, about current tactics in the Global War on Terror.

The web site frames the discussion like this:

The CIA has released "the Family Jewels," agents' reports on 25 years of illegal activities ending in 1974. CIA Director, General Michael Hayden, says it reveals "a very different time and a very different agency." How different is the CIA now, with Dick Cheney holding the intelligence portfolio for President Bush?

The podcast of the episode.

These revelations come as Vice President Dick Cheney's Office is coming under increasing scrutiny by law makers.

Never in history has the office of the vice president been so large. Conventionally, the office was seen as that of an 'apprentice', an 'observer', ready to fill the void should the president become un-able to execute the office.

Now it seems to be a clearing house for black operations, a way to compartmentalize, isolate the office of the president from illegal activities which the president could be impeached for under law passed in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

From USA Today:

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said Sunday that a court should decide whether the vice president belongs to the executive or legislative branch. "The vice president needs to make a decision," he said.

Lea Anne McBride, a Cheney spokeswoman, said Emanuel is the one who has to decide. "He can either deal with the serious issues facing our country or create more partisan politics," she said.

The Empirists are saying, this is like WW ll, the state requires special powers to fight The Global War on Terror. They're objective would appear to be the repeal of the 'Watergate' laws.



mh

Essentially, Lieutenant-Colonel Rob Walker Is Lying By Omission.

In my last post on the War in Afghanistan I tried to give a broad picture of the Taleban offensive and NATO's reaction to it.

Now, a little more detail on the Kind of war Canadian soldiers are fighting.

(Here's some music to listen to while reading THIS article.)

I came across this quote from Lieutenant-Colonel Rob Walker, battle group commander for the Canadian contingent in Afghanistan, in the Saturday June 23, 2007 edition of the Globe and Mail in a story by Graeme Smith entitled, "Afghan Civilian Casualties Soaring":

“We're being very judicious about our fire,” Col. Walker said. “We've had no complaints about women and children getting killed.”

That's horse sh*t.

When Canadian Forces find Taleban dug in, they call in air support from 'Enduring Freedom', the US operation in Afghanistan, who then - guided by lasers pointed by Canadians - blow the target to smithereens.

Essentially, Lieutenant-Colonel Rob Walker is lying by omission.

(WARNING: the following contains horrific detail.)

After the bombs hit, our boys don't experience that disingenuous tripe; instead they get reality. They go in and reconnoiter the target - to see how many Taleban bodies they can identify - and in some cases, they get to count dismembered corpses of babies, women and old men.

And then they get to puke.

One of the most awful descriptions of the casualties I've heard of in this new era of high energy explosives comes from Iraq...

You get to the target, and there's movement in the smoke, 'things' are moving in there - then you realize it's people, live people - with no arms or legs, in shock - they're trying to move, trying to get away... get to safety.

Our young men are now faced with a moral dilemma (if there's no superior officer present), shoot them in the head to put them out of their misery; or try to tourniquet the stubs (which, when you try, just breaks the burnt skin and makes the wound worse); or do you continue about your duties, secure the area etc., while the bodies continue to scream, writhe, and finally die.

A third option, give the one screaming the loudest, the heroin in your med kit (which is against regulation, but you can replace it easily enough).


Here's another example of spin doctoring from the battle group commander of Canadian Forces in Afghanistan; from a June 14, 2007 Globe and Mail story by Graeme Smith. (now, only available with a subscription from Canada's National, Profiting from Death, Newspaper.)

"Pressure from NATO forces has so far prevented the Taliban from forming into large attack groups of the kind witnessed last year", Lt.-Col. Walker said..

That's horse sh*t too.

The tanks we shipped over there last year... ..that has nothing to do with the Talebans changed tactics this year... ..like we should all feel better knowing we fought them to a stand-off LAST year.

While we're at it, if we're talking about the 'last war', why not mention how surprised we were when they used regular tactics, the failure in our intelligence, that gave us no clue that they were capable of that level of organization.

Don't try to bull sh*t the Canadian people, Lieutenant-Colonel Rob Walker, Canadians may be a few days behind the news, but we're not stupid - or ignorant.

Why is the battle group commander running psychological operations any way? Does DND not have a communication department in country?

Man, we look provincial.


In other developments, CTV reported that,

"..NDP Leader Jack Layton said Canada should stop aggressive military action in the war-torn country and move towards political negotiations."

Agreed, but we should be in constant negotiation with the enemy, even if we decide that continuing aggressive military action is in our interest.



mh

More Lost Battles In Afghanistan - The Forgotten War

In my last post on the Taleban offensive in Afghanistan, I supposed Canadian Forces were likely in the thick of it.

They are.

On Wednesday, three Canadian soldiers died on the road near Masum Gar, Afghanistan.

Written by Stephanie Levitz, Canadian Press @ Canada.com

"The blast killed all three soldiers in the vehicle while they were carrying out a resupply operation near a forward-operating base at Sperwan Ghar, the military said."

And later in the same story...

"The latest deaths came on the day of the military funeral for 25-year-old Trooper Darryl Caswell in Bowmanville, Ontario. He was also killed by a roadside bomb on June 11, when the Canadian military in Afghanistan came across a large number of improvised explosive devices."

The national media is presently reticent to offer an over-view, from scant reports, about what's going on in this forgotten war. I am not as reticent as they, but I understand their point. Writing war is full of land mines; what you think is going on, is probably wrong. If your facts are straight, the story may not be temporal.

Luckily, I am not beholden to anyone at this blog, only the attentions of you readers. So, here are a collection of my 'temporal slices' from this forgotten war.


The new British ambassador to Afghanistan, in his first statement in his present capacity expressed either the level of his ignorance, or the height of his arrogance...

(quoted from an article in The Independent, June 20, 2007, by James Tapsfield, my emphasis)

Ambassador, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles:

"The great(?!) thing about the Taliban is that they haven't been reading their Chairman Mao. They don't have popular support."

The Taleban are not disciples of the idea of populism like the communist movement(which champion the majority, peasants or workers), that the ambassador refers to.

Taleban don't care if they have popular support; in 'imperially occupied territories', they create a tension of insecurity, going as far as butchering citizens they deem un-Islamic. On this Podcast from The Guardian Unlimited "..Declan Walsh reports on how locals are resisting this Talibanisation. Also, see an informative audio slide show, historical backgrounder, from the Guardian Unlimited.

The Taleban exude purposefulness and discipline; and they demand popular obedience, not support. They are the products of a sect of fundamentalist Islam's, 'madrassa', schooling. They are the elite of a education system that teaches extreme intolerance and armed insurrection towards an Islamic state. They insist on an extreme standard of public decorum in the areas they dominate. Disobedience is rewarded with brutal public sanction, including death.

The population is suffering under the Tabeban's Islamic law, murder-squads, and a NATO war machine that is unbelievably powerful, destructive, and indiscriminate. The Taleban draw their enemy to fight in populated areas because towns are the fulcrum of government power; and it is to their strategic advantage. Regularly, a village will become a free fire zone, a rule of engagement I've heard interpreted as, 'shoot anything that moves' orders. And they do.

Published in the New York Times Barry Bearak and Taimoor Shah wrote,

KABUL, Afghanistan, June 18, 2007

Afghan officials said late Monday that more than 50 civilians may have died during fierce fighting over the past three days between NATO forces and the Taliban in the Chora district of the southern province of Uruzgan.

Lost that battle.

That's Canada's bailiwick. No reports yet as to which NATO force was involved.

Maj. Dave Quick, commanding officer of India Company, Royal Canadian Regiment, told Stephanie Levitz,

"..Wednesday's (June 20, 2007) battle was longest firefight his company has been in even though it was their 12th combat mission in the last month."

On Thursday Canadian troops were involved in another action in Helmand province.

By Peter Walker of The Guardian

"The air strike - which happened late yesterday (June 21, 2007) - was launched in response to an attack on police posts near the town of Gereshk by militants. It killed 25 civilians including nine women, three babies and the mullah of a local mosque."

Lost that battle.

Later in the same story Peter Walker writes.

According to the Associated Press news agency, the latest deaths - if confirmed - will bring the number of civilians killed in NATO or US-led military operations this year to 177. Among these were seven children who died in a US air strike on Sunday.

A total of 169 civilians have been killed in militant attacks this year, including a recent series of suicide bombings.

So between us and them are 346 civilian dead.

"The latest NATO deaths bring to 606 the number of foreign troops killed in action in Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taleban in 2001."(from © Reuters 2007)

Sixty Canadians serving in the Canadian Forces and one diplomat have died in Afghanistan so far.

I hope this over-view gives Canadians an idea of the intensity of action our soldiers are facing right now.

Map courtesy of University of Texas, Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection

Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief (ACBAR) press release: "Protecting Afghan civilians: Statement on the conduct of military operations."



mh

"Invite The Taleban To Join A Broad-Based National Government In Afghanistan"

The Taleban are taking the war to us, as expected. Right now in Afghanistan, Canadians are likely in the thick of it, marshaling in response to a multi pronged offensive by the Taleban. The Taleban's tactical plan for this year is to attack closer and closer to the capital, while simultaneously attacking strong points everywhere -- towards toppling the government.

"What did he say???"

That's right folks, that's where we are, that's the topic list.

The Taleban are attacking towns as close as 150 miles from Kabul. No road is 'safe' as police stations all over the country are being attacked; forcing the NATO war colossus to operate in a complex, multi faceted manner -- testing the limits of it's advantage.

We have lost the hearts and minds of Afghans by now, I fear. If this continues into the summer, then the war is over -- time to pack up and leave.

June 19, 2007 -- BBC NEWS,

By BBC World Affairs editor, John Simpson

In the east of the country, around Jalalabad, suicide bombings have become such frequent occurrences that the road from there to Kabul is now known as "the Baghdad road".

In the far western, Herat Province, May 31, 2007 BBC NEWS,

By Alastair Leithead

He described how it was only after the villagers were angered by culturally insensitive house searches that they picked up guns and took on the American military machine.

"When the Americans came the people started fighting them back, and then the planes came and started bombing us. "Even under the Russians we haven't witnessed bombardments like it before."

The Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) investigated the accounts and identified that at least 25 of those killed in Shindand were women and children.

Lost that battle.

In the following, the mans question gets to the point - the battle is not to beat the Taleban with military might, it can't be done, but rather to win the hearts and minds of Afghans.

From BBC NEWS story, "Afghan villagers answer your questions"
(My emphasis)

QUESTION: from Farid Mamundzay, Birmingham, UK,

It is often argued that Afghanistan was peaceful during the Taleban rule, and that after their fall, the country has not enjoyed the same level of peace and stability. Do you agree? Do you see the presence of foreign forces important for the future of Afghanistan or should the Taleban be invited to participate in a broad national government?

ANSWER: from, Rahmat Gul:

You are partly right. People did enjoy peace and stability. But Taleban laws were harsh and draconian. Now the laws are within the framework of a democracy and if we implement them we could have more peace and security.

To your second question - I think foreign forces should coordinate their operations with Afghan forces in a bigger way to avoid civilian casualties.

The thing is that if you invite the Taleban to join a broad-based national government, there will be no need for foreign troops in the country at all. It would not be such a bad idea, though I wonder how the Taleban would react to such a proposal.

It would be a good idea to declare an amnesty for all the indigenous Taleban and bring them into the mainstream of politics. The foreign Taleban should be kept out.

Invite the Taleban to join a broad-based national government, in exchange, NATO could leave. I wonder how the Taleban would react to such a proposal. As we see in Gaza, the fundamentalists don't play well with others... The other choice, for both sides, is endless this.

Building schools has failed I believe, because the tactic falls directly into the scope of the most effective of Taleban tactics -- playing to the fears of men and boys, who's identity is already in an abused state, now challenged by a liberating of women in the law -- while their identifier, farming, remains impossible because irrigation projects 1000's of years in use, remain destroyed from thirty years of war.

Rebuilding and improving the irrigation infrastructure, would employ farmers in their own self interest. They gain back identity in providing for their families, and the Taleban lose a fighter -- progress then would then surely follow.

Irrigation Infrastructure should be the the focus of a re-newed attempt, that is coming soon, to re-build infrastructure. Essential, culturally based infrastructure like the irrigation system --would help Afghans live day to day, and at the same time employ would be fighters at farming, and thus empower the family and local authority against the Taleban.

Information in the form of high quality color coded topographical mapping, and meteorological information would be a great way to interlock with the local economy -- and later as security returns, help NATO influence WHAT is grown with the water.

I fear these are but lost opportunities in the this, other imperial blunder. We have lost so many battles for minds in Afghanistan, and our tactics remain intractable -- that we are now losing this war.




mh

For What It's Worth, A Take From Baghdad

The following from RiverBend; a blog by an Iraqi Citizen living in Baghdad.(link in Title of posts)

"The Americans have done a fine job of working to break it(Iraq) apart. This last year has nearly everyone convinced that that was the plan right from the start. There were too many blunders for them to actually have been, simply, blunders. The 'mistakes' were too catastrophic. The people the Bush administration chose to support and promote were openly and publicly terrible- from the conman and embezzler Chalabi, to the terrorist Jaffari, to the militia man Maliki. The decisions, like disbanding the Iraqi army, abolishing the original constitution, and allowing militias to take over Iraqi security were too damaging to be anything but intentional."

I've seen bigger 'mistakes' executed in war. Myopic blunders in war become catastrophes on the ground very quickly.

On the other hand a Strategy of Tensions designed towards a larger war that the US Army could win is not a new idea.

For what it's worth, that's a take from Baghdad.



mh

Iran Shoots Down US Spy Plane

For what it's worth, a take from Terhan...

FARS News agency(IRAN)

TEHRAN (Fars News Agency)- Iranian military troops have shot down a spy plane of the US army during the last few days, an Iranian MP said here on Tuesday.

Bush end game?




mh

How Did We Get Here? An Analysis

Canadian soldier at Kandahar


That is not my oil, that is not my beautiful car.

Originally published September 4, 2006

Canadian soldiers are now involved in a NATO counter insurgency in Afghanistan. This summer, for the first time since Korea we saw Canadian soldiers in a fire-fight. How did we get here?

Well, 9/11 happened - Al-Qaeda was blamed. The government of Afghanistan, the Taliban, aided and abetted them. On October 7 the area bombing of Taliban strong-holds began. The Americans supported one of several groups fighting in parts of Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance and others formed a provisional government on April 18, 2002; officially ousting the Taliban; and institutionalizing US primacy in Central Asia.

Canadian troops were sent by the Liberal government of Jean Chretien in 2002; to fill a power vacuum created by US bombing, and to rebuild the country after 10 years of Soviet occupation and 10 more years of civil war.

Four years later the Taliban have regrouped. What we are doing there now, in no way resembles peace keeping or reconstruction. Canadian soldiers are involved in a NATO counter insurgency. Its time to take stock.

How did we get here, why are we trying to kill them? Oh yes.., 'the Taliban aided and abetted Al-Qaeda'.

The Taliban are no friends to democracy, rule of law, the enlightenment, or equal rights. They desire a theocracy like the Dark Ages(400 - 1600AD) - when Rome projected terror across Europe to maintain its' primacy - not anything like the German Fascism of the 1930's and '40's the Whitehouse keeps pumping. Neither are they friends of an oil pipeline on the northern border. A pipeline that would send regional resources west, to the USA; or the 'Great Satan', in their vernacular.

I personally wouldn't support a government like that; but that doesn't mean I would go to war with them either.

The Taliban stopped the opium crop when they were in power, something we cannot seem to do. The Taliban have never invaded a foreign land; they are not even a regional power. At this time, a multi-polar global power negotiation is in progress; Taliban rule, while hard to stomach could be a stabilizing force right now. The alternative, an unwinnable urban war could become much worse.

Tolerating the DE-facto situation in Afghanistan is not defeat, its clear thinking. Canada, as a member NORAD and a transmogrified NATO should push for another way.

We could have cut a deal with the Taliban in 2001; we may need to now. Before more blood is spilt, NATO's political leaders should talk with the Taliban who controlled 90% of the country pre-9/11.

A US 'No Fly Zone' would project Imperial tranquility with-in a schematic borrowed from British imperial history; a step 'back to the future', towards the G-8 model of the balance of powers pre 9/11. To facilitate this the Americans have to recognise Russian control of her oil industry; just as congress blocked China from buying UNICOL the largest energy company in the world(US), the Russians are protecting their national interest, albeit with slight of hand and 'lawyering'.

A 'No Fly Zone' would facilitate an intelligence net and the ability for the US to project influence on the Taliban government; and to maintain their primacy with-out Al Qaeda or other forces. It would continue to fortify and stabilize the Northern Alliance, and with Russian help, ensure passivity along the northern border; bringing relative stability to the entire region.

We need to deal. The question is, do the Taliban still want to make a deal, now that they have us perplexed militarily? The road out will hurt more than the road in; but less than an unending counter-insurgency amongst an increasingly desperate civilian population.

We have to make a deal. With in a model that recognizes American primacy we can propose: give the Taliban power with-in a new US hegemony that recognizes the strategic importance of the northern frontier and the impropriety of tolerating Al Qaeda's presence. This would serve all the demands of Bush's' 'war on terrorism' and the underlying strategic objective: an stable oil pipe-line corridor to Turkey.

One problem with this plan is that the Northern Alliance and the Taliban were at war pre 9/11. The Taliban may have been involved in the assassination of the Alliances top field commander, Ahmed Shah Masood. But the reality of the situation is that they would have no choice but to accept the power. Undoubtedly they would display a genuine front while perusing other agenda. This is standard when empires try to project their will.

All this speaks to the complex inter-dependencies present, in the largest Geo-political sense. Canada with its vast oil and gas reserves, has very little interest in any of these machinations, aside from one.

We need another assembly line at the Oakville Car Plant. In jest of coarse, but it represents a critical part of our Strategic National Interest. The basis of the post war affluence in Canada was the Auto-Pact. Canada traded leading Jet technology and expertise to the Americans for a share in the American automobile market and other things. This guaranteed Canada's post war affluence; and Americas primacy in air power and space power.

If we continued the "head in the sand", Jean Chretien strategy of doing as little as possible while continually telling the Americans they're too loud, the USA might restrict trade with-in a post 9/11 xenophobic reaction.

American protectionism is not on the political front burner right now in Washington, instead it's been over shadowed by a ugly drift towards persecution of non-citizens, witnessed by the massive Latino demonstrations around the still stalled immigration bill. Illuminating just how important citizenship has become to protecting ones self from both real and perceived new anti-terrorism powers of the state.

60% of Americans polled think their army should be out of the Iraq debacle. They can hardly be vitriolic now if we suggest a different coarse. In fact we might be their best friends again by 2008. We should lead and innovate now, be the honest broker.

This congressional election year, the Whitehouse is easing up on the rhetoric and is trying to look more conciliatory. Surrounded by litigation and corruption scandals all around, and a quagmire in Iraq, the administration might be willing to talk.

Lets make a deal!





mh