Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Beast of the Month - February 2008

Expand Messages
  • Robert Sterling
    Please send as far and wide as possible. Thanks, Robert Sterling Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com Beast of the Month - February 2008 Mullah
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 31, 2008
      Please send as far and wide as possible.

      Robert Sterling
      Editor, The Konformist

      Beast of the Month - February 2008
      Mullah Omar, Taliban Leader

      "I yam an anti-Christ... "
      John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the

      "They're back..."
      Poltergeist II tagline

      Anyone searching for proof about how bad the "War on Terror" is
      going needs to look no further than Pakistan.

      In the aftermath of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the CIA
      (along with the London's Scotland Yard) has agreed with the Pakistan
      government's controversial assertion that the deed was plotted by
      Baitullah Mehsud, a Taliban commander with ties to Al Qaeda. The
      conclusion goes hand in hand with (until now) underreported news
      stories of the rise in power by Taliban forces in Afghanistan. That
      it could be even admitted as plausible the Taliban killed Bhutto is
      an indictment on how the War on Terror has been waged, as one of the
      few things even the harshest critic of the Bush Administration could
      concede is the loss of power to the repressive Taliban regime
      deserves no tears. True, right wing hacks will no doubt try to
      frame the Bhutto assassination as a reminder Al Qaeda and the
      Taliban are still a menace to the world. Still, it more likely fits
      the playbook of the Democratic Party's talking points: that by
      invading Iraq, the Bush Team fought a war with a country with no
      ties to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda while dropping the ball on the
      real battle in Afghanistan.

      Of course, there's a reason why the CIA and Scotland Yard have so
      quickly embraced the "Taliban and Al Qaeda did it" conspiracy
      theory: the alternative is even more distasteful to the American
      establishment. After all, the reason the Taliban theory is so
      controversial in Pakistan is because the public widely believes the
      political hit was actually orchestrated by Pervez Musharraf, to wipe
      out the greatest political threat to his dictatorial reign. The
      theory is supported by missing evidence (most notably the washing
      down of streets before blood evidence could be collected, and the
      blocking of an autopsy by police) showing a high-ranking cover-up,
      shoddy security protection at the time of her murder, official lies
      about her cause of death, vote-rigging evidence in the recent
      Pakistan "election" which Bhutto was to hand to US Congressmen on
      her day of death and an email Bhutto wrote three weeks before her
      murder where she warned of a plot to kill her, organized by
      Musharraf cronies rather than Al Qaeda. In short, had the CIA not
      backed the official story, the US public would now have to
      acknowledge a partner in the "War on Terror" is a dictatorship that
      ruthlessly murders its political opponents.

      For once, though, the US establishment may actually be telling the
      truth. Or, more precisely, perhaps they are both lying and telling
      the truth. To explain, The Konformist provides this little guide to
      Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Taliban and Al Qaeda:

      * WHAT IS THE TALIBAN? Okay, this one is easy background. A
      fundamentalist Islam nationalist movement led by Mullah Omar (The
      Konformist Beast of the Month) that took control of Afghanistan in
      1996, it was initially embraced by much of the Afghan public for
      restoring law and order. Soon it became a repressive regime and
      international pariah, enforcing a strict Muslim religious doctrine
      which included the subjugation of women, mass murder of political
      opponents, outlawing of nearly all modern culture and the 2001
      destruction of two 6th century Buddha statues that were perhaps
      Afghanistan's most noted cultural artifacts. Their immense
      financial aid from Osama bin Laden led to their downfall, as Team
      USA knocked them out of power after 9/11. Despite this setback,
      they have been on the rise in power since 2006, with multiple
      statements by Omar released for propaganda purposes.

      * WHAT IS THE ISI? The Inter-Services Intelligence is Pakistan's
      largest and most powerful intelligence agency, their version of the
      CIA, and one of the most powerful intelligence agencies in the world.

      officially on different sides of the "Good Vs. Evil" paradigm
      promoted by the Bush Team in the Terror War, they still have covert
      contacts that benefit both parties. For example, Pakistan allows
      the Taliban to remain hidden in their borders, in exchange for not
      becoming a primary target of radical Islam. Furthermore, they both
      have a joint opponent in Afghanistan, and the ISI allowing the
      Taliban to flourish creates a force that only weakens a competitive

      * ARE THERE TIES BETWEEN THE ISI AND THE CIA? Absolutely, indeed,
      many activities done by the ISI can be viewed as simple proxy
      operations done for the CIA's bidding.

      Good question. Obviously, officially there is no link between the
      two after 9/11. Still, it has to be acknowledged the Taliban is
      pretty much a CIA creation thanks to the war between Afghanistan and
      the USSR. Further, there were massive negotiations between the
      Taliban and US oil companies (which the CIA is often just foot
      soldiers for) as late as the summer of 2001 over a proposed deal to
      allow access to untapped crude in the Caspian Sea, worth an
      estimated $3 trillion in 2001 oil prices. (When the talks broke
      down, the Taliban were warned to "accept our offer of a carpet of
      gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.") Of course, now the
      CIA and Taliban are officially enemies, but intelligence contacts
      are treasured, and at the very least some back channel contacts
      likely still exist.

      one has a surprisingly murky answer. First, the most shocking link:
      Mohammed Atta, the alleged lead hijacker and ringleader of the 9/11
      plot, was wired $100,000 from Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad, then head
      of the ISI. Was Atta a covert ISI agent? It sure looks that way.
      This evidence ties the ISI more closely to 9/11 than either the
      Taliban or much maligned Saudi Arabia. (For example, in Fahrenheit
      9/11, Michael Moore made much of the Saudis being the not-so-secret
      bogeyman, yet Pakistan's suspicious role was completely ignored.)
      It's hard to dismiss the idea that whatever Atta was doing was at
      the behest of Pakistan. It's also hard to ignore that since much of
      what the ISI does is at the CIA's request, this gives some strength
      to theories that 9/11 was an inside job. As for the ties between
      the CIA and Al Qaeda, like the Taliban, the entire beginnings of Al
      Qaeda are tied to the CIA's war against the USSR in Afghanistan.
      Having said all this, why are the links between the ISI, CIA and Al
      Qaeda so murky? The answer lies in an even more ignored question...

      * DOES "AL QAEDA" EVEN EXIST? This is a question few dare ask, and
      the answer can be persuasively argued to be no. First, even The
      Konformist admits, "Al Qaeda" is an easy (and cool-sounding)
      shorthand for a collection of radical Islamic terrorist groups who
      are waging war against Team America. In this sense, Al Qaeda
      certainly is real. But is it a unified network of anti-American
      jihadists who answer to their evil mastermind Osama bin Laden?
      Sorry, but this version of things is bogus. In the BBC documentary
      The Power of Nightmares, evidence is laid out that "Al Qaeda"
      (Arabic for "The Base" and a term never used publicly by Osama
      before the 9/11 attacks) was concocted in 2001 by the US DOJ to nail
      bin Laden as a head of a crime network. Thus, any radical Islam
      terror actions could be ultimately linked to Osama under the "Al
      Qaeda" banner. Unfortunately, this has allowed many smaller groups
      with competing agendas to be lumped together under a monolithic
      banner, all to hype up a giant leviathan for propaganda purposes.
      And even then, the supposed size of "Al Qaeda" is highly
      exaggerated, inflated by (for example) including those who fought
      against the USSR in the eighties but are not at war with anyone and
      certainly aren't allies of bin Laden. And speaking of bin Laden,
      here's another question that is being ignored...

      * IS OSAMA EVEN ALIVE? If he is, The Konformist hasn't found any
      good evidence to support the claim. The latest supposed video of
      him from September 2007 looks clearly like an imposter, and this
      isn't the first bogus Osama passed off as the real deal in the
      mainstream press. It's unlikely this would be done if the real
      Osama was still around. Meanwhile, in his speeches, Osama has
      morphed from a "death to America" Islamo-fascist to a Chomsky-
      quoting critic of American foreign policy (who no doubt wears
      Birkenstocks, drives a Prius and has Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth
      on his Netflix queue.) The end result of Osama's conversion is even
      Nation-reading establishment lefties can be smeared for parroting
      the propaganda of "bin Laden" when criticizing the Iraqi Quagmire.

      So let's put this all together. Even if, as the Pakistan
      government, CIA and Scotland Yard all insist, the Bhutto
      assassination was a Taliban operation, does that let Musharraf and
      the ISI off the hook? Or could the Taliban have been doing a
      contract hit on behalf of the Pakistan state? (In fact, in 2005,
      alleged Bhutto assassination mastermind Mehsud was offered over
      $300K by Pakistan to sign a peace deal he would later agree to, so a
      business relationship already did exist.)

      Does it go even further? Is it possible the Bhutto assassination
      may have US Government fingerprints over it? At the very least,
      right-wing commentator Bob Novak believes the US let her be killed
      to prop up Musharraf. Beyond that claim, let's look at the main
      thing the US establishment would have against her: she was pursuing
      peace agreements with both Islamic fundamentalists and the state of
      Israel. While her plans could have led to less violence and a
      future Nobel Peace Prize, lessened tensions in the area would
      dismantle the excuse for US presence, potentially leaving American
      oil companies shut out of the Caspian Sweepstakes. Meanwhile, in a
      November 2007 interview with David Frost, Bhutto stated bin Laden
      had already been murdered by an "Al Qaeda" rival Omar Sheikh.
      Although this was later dismissed as a verbal mistake (supposedly,
      she meant Daniel Pearl had been murdered, not bin Laden) after her
      death, it's interesting to note she never corrected herself, nor did
      her seasoned interviewer Frost ask for a clarification.

      At this point, though, all this is history, albeit recent and
      important history. The bigger question is what will happen to the
      Taliban. The Konformist guess is they're not going anywhere, and
      will only get more powerful as time goes on. Whatever the Taliban's
      faults, many Afghanis felt safer from crime when they were in power,
      thus explaining any mass popularity they continue to have. Last
      September, Afghan prez Hamid Karzai recognized this reality and
      offered to negotiate with Taliban leaders, including Mullah Omar.
      While the Taliban remains an officially sanctioned bogeyman, it
      seems plausible that so-called "moderate" Taliban leaders (i.e.
      those willing to give US oil companies sweetheart deals) could be
      embraced and rejoin the Afghan establishment. If that happens, you
      heard it hear first.

      In any case, we salute Mullah Omar as Beast of the Month.
      Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Omar!!!


      Baker, Aryn and Robinson, Simon. "Missing Evidence from Bhutto's
      Murder." Time 31 December 2007

      "Benazir Bhutto Said Osama bin Laden Was Dead." Prison Planet 28
      December 2007

      "Bhutto Broke Her Agreement with the CIA, She Wanted to Talk with
      the Islamists." Roads to Iraq 29 December 2007

      "Bhutto Wanted Ties with Israel, Sought Mossad Protection." Israel
      Today 28 December 2007 <http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?

      "Bhutto Was to Give U.S. Lawmakers Vote-rigging Report." CNN 1
      January 2008

      Bright, Arthur. "CIA Blames Al Qaeda, Taliban for Bhutto
      Assassination." Christian Science Monitor 19 January 2008

      Brisard, Jean-Charles and Dasquie, Guillaume. Forbidden Truth: U.S.-
      Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for Bin Laden. New
      York: Nation Books, 2002.

      Chin, Larry. "Anglo-American Ambitions Behind the Assassination of
      Benazir Bhutto and Destabilization of Pakistan." Online Journal 31
      December 2007

      Chossudovsky, Michel. America's "War on Terrorism". Quebec, Global
      Research, 2005.

      Chossudovsky, Michel. "Cover-up or Complicity of the Bush
      Administration?" Global Research 2 November 2001

      "How Did Pakistan's Bhutto Die?" CNN 28 December 2007

      Juliano, Nick. "Police Abandoned Security Posts Before Bhutto
      Assassination." Raw Story 28 December 2007

      "Karzai Talks Peace After Bus Bomb." CNN 29 September 2007

      "Lawyer: Police Prevented Bhutto Autopsy." CNN 1 January 2008

      Meacher, Michael. "The Pakistan Connection." The Guardian 22 July
      2004 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jul/22/usa.september11>.

      Novak, Robert. "Sacrificing Bhutto to Prop Up Musharraf?" Chicago
      Sun Times 31 December 2007

      "Osama bin Laden: The Newest Fake." What Really Happened

      Page, Jeremy. "Who Killed Benazir Bhutto? The Main Suspects." Global
      Research 27 December 2007 <http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?

      "Pakistan Pays Tribe al-Qaeda Debt." BBC News 9 February 2005

      Qayum, Khalid and Ahmed, Khaleeq. "Bhutto Attack Probably a Taliban
      Plot, Ministry Says." Bloomberg 28 December 2007

      Rashid, Ahmed. Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia.
      New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002.

      Rashid, Ahmed. Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in
      Central Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.

      Robinson, Simon. "Bhutto Conspiracy Theories Fill the Air." Time 28
      December 2007

      Sherwell, Philip. "Bhutto 'Blocked from Hiring US Bodyguards'."
      Telegraph 31 December 2007

      Walters, Simon. "Bhutto Email Named Killers Weeks Before
      Assassination." Daily Mail 30 December 2007

      Watson, Steve. "New Bin Laden Video: 100% Forgery." Infowars.net 10
      September 2007

      If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist
      Newswire, please visit http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/konformist
      and sign up. Or, e-mail konformist-subscribe@yahoogroups.com with
      the subject: "I NEED 2 KONFORM!!!" (Okay, you can use something
      else, but it's a kool catch phrase.)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.