PAKISTAN Special

Lately we are flooded with friends. The Great of the Earth, past and present, come here to flatter us, to fawn on us, to grovel at our feet.

"God, save me from my friends, my enemies, I can deal with myself!" says an old prayer.

They disgust me.

Let's take for example the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, who made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem . Her pandering was free of any criticism and she reached new heights of obsequiousness in her speech to the Knesset. I was invited to attend. I relinquished the privilege.

I shall also pass the pleasure when I am invited to the session with the hyper-active Nicholas Sarkozy, who will try to break the flattery record of his German rival.  Before that we were visited by John McCain's mentor, the evangelical pastor John Hagee, the one who described the Catholic Church as a monster. Oozing sanctimonious flattery from every pore, he forbade us, in the name of (his) God, to give up even one inch of the Holy Land and commanded us to fight to the last drop of (our) blood.

However, not one of them has come close to George Bush. Approaching the end of the most disastrous presidency in the annals of the Republic, he really forced a lighted match into the hand of our government, encouraging it to ignite the barrel of gunpowder between our feet.

But the list of present-day leaders who participate in the pandering competition pales in comparison with the long parade of Has-Beens who lay siege to our gates.  A world-wide swarm of Has-Beens is flying from place to place like bees, all for one and one for all. This week they alighted in Jerusalem, on the invitation of Has-Been No. 1: Shimon Peres, a politician who in all the 84 years of his life has never won an election, and who was finally handed, out of sheer compassion, the largely meaningless title of President of Israel.

The common denominator of this group is that their prestige at home is close to nil, while their standing abroad is sky-high. Their mutual adoration compensates them for the lack of respect in their own countries. One of the senior members of this club is Tony Blair, who has been pushed from power in his own country but is not content to enjoy his pension and raise roses. As a consolation prize he has been granted the pleasure of playing around with our conflict. Every few weeks he convenes a press conference to present the good tidings of his phenomenal success in ameliorating the lot of the Palestinians, while the actual situation in the occupied territories goes from bad to worse. Our security establishment treats him like a bore who has to be thrown a crumb from time to time to keep him happy.

In the conference that took place this week there were also some good people, but the scene was stolen by the Has-Beens, from the retired war criminal Henry Kissinger to the dethroned peace hero Mikhail Gorbachev (whom I still consider a hero for preventing bloodshed during the collapse of the Soviet empire.) Pity to see him in this company.

All the participants in this orgy heaped mountains of fawning adulation on Israel . Not one of them had a word of criticism. No occupation. No settlements. No Gaza blockade. No daily killings. Just a wonderful, peace-loving state that the bad, bad terrorists want to throw into the sea.

Not one of the guests stood up to warn us against going on with the present policy. Not one of them stood up to proclaim the truth: that the continuation of this policy may lead our state to disaster. He who has friends like these has no need for enemies. A person who sees his friend playing Russian roulette and offers him bullets - is he a real friend? One who sees his friend standing on the brink of an abyss and tells him "go ahead" - is he a friend?

Among the fraternity of flatterers, the ones that attracted the most attention were the Jewish billionaires from America (who also paid for the extravaganza). Several of them were summoned to police headquarters immediately on arrival to give evidence on the affair that is rocking Israel now - the corruption investigation of Ehud Olmert. A smell of corruption has accompanied Olmert right from his beginnings in politics, 45 years ago. But this time, the smell is overpowering. The police has made it known that the American-Jewish billionaire Moshe Morris Talansky has been supplying him with cash-filled envelopes for years.

Where have we seen this before? Of course, in American movies and TV-series. Somebody opens a suitcase stuffed with bundles of banknotes. The donor invariably belongs to the Mafia, and the recipient is generally a corrupt politician. Can it be that Olmert has never seen these films - he of all people, who started his career with demagogic speeches denouncing "Organized Crime"?

But it is not Olmert who interests me in this affair so much as Talansky.  He belongs to a species of "Israel-loving" billionaires, most of them resident in the US, but also in Canada and Switzerland, Austria and Australia and other places. They are all Israeli patriots. They are all philanthropists. All contribute millions to Israeli politicians. And almost all of them support our extreme Right.

What makes them run? What induces these billionaires to do what they are doing?

A research in depth discovers that a great many of them made their money in dark corners. Some are gambling barons, casino-owners with all the inevitable connections with violence, crime and exploitation. One at least made his fortunes from brothels. Another was involved in a scandal involving old people's homes. Yet another is a scion of a family who made their money bootlegging during prohibition days. Some are arms merchants of the most despicable kind, selling weapons to the political gangs which sow death and destruction in Africa .

But money, as is well known, does not smell. Most of the multi-millionaires of this kind feel that they are not receiving the honor due to them. Their co-billionaires, high society people, treat them with disdain. A person reaching this position is not satisfied with money alone. He craves honor. Such honor can be bought in Israel , on the cheap.

Israel is selling honor of all kinds, no questions asked. For a suitable donation, even a gambling-hell owner will be received by the Prime Minister, dine with the President, put his name on a university building. (Once I wrote a light-hearted piece about the Third Temple , may God build it soon, Amen: the Rosenstein Holy of Holiest, the Rosenzweig altar, the Rosenberg cherubim, etc.)

Just after the Six-day War, during the great days of our generals, a new fashion spread among the best Jewish billionaires: to keep an Israeli general, in order to present him to friends as a pet. Some generals found no fault in this. It was owed to them, after all. One billionaire kept Ezer Weizman, the Air Force hero (who had to resign from the presidency when it came out). Two billionaires adopted Ariel Sharon and set him up in the largest farm in the country. Shimon Peres was no general (and not even a soldier), but at least three billionaires took him under their golden wings. No billionaire ever lost money by keeping an Israeli general, supporting an Israeli politician or making a generous donation to an Israeli cause. Ego is ego, patriotism is patriotism, but business is business. That's where the corruption set in. A person who donates millions to a politician in Israel (or, for that matter, the US, or Italy or any other place on the globe) knows full well that he will get it back with interest. When the politician becomes a minister, or Prime Minister, or President, the supporter has hit the jackpot.

In politics there is no innocent donation. One way or another, the donor will reap his reward - many times over. That's true in the US, that's true in Italy, that's true in Israel , too. If the donor declares to the police that he has no business interests in Israel , all it means is that they must dig deeper. The Olmert affair confirms anew what we have known for a long time: the fuel Israeli politics runs on is not just money, but money from abroad. To win primaries and campaign in elections, a candidate needs millions, and these almost always come from foreign donors. Foreign billionaires financed Olmert in the party primaries, and they financed him in the general elections, in which he was assured of becoming Prime Minister. After being elected, he started Lebanon War II, with all its death and destruction. It can be said: American Jewish billionaires killed the soldiers and civilians, Israeli and Lebanese, who lost their lives in the war.

In his speech to the Jerusalem conference, Shimon Peres lauded Israeli chutzpa. What we need is more chutzpa, he said. That sounded fetching and naughty, but was pure poppycock. I want to speak about another chutzpa. Not metaphorical, but real. Simple chutzpa. The chutzpa of billionaires in New York and Geneva and all the other places who interfere in our elections and determine the fate of our nation. The chutzpa of donating for a war in which not their sons, but ours, are killed. The chutzpa of sending billions for the establishment of settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, and especially in Jerusalem , which are put there for the express purpose of preventing peace and imposing on us a permanent war, a war that threatens our future - not theirs.

Let's be clear: I am not criticizing well-meaning donors, who feel a moral need to contribute to a hospital wing or a university building in Israel . I appreciate people who send a few hundred dollars to a political cause close to their heart. I object to foreign billionaires who aspire to dictate the direction of our state. Perhaps in other countries, too, politicians receive donations from foreign sources. But it is generally a marginal phenomenon. Here it is a major factor. That is one of the ill effects of the definition of Israel as a "Jewish State". Because of this, these donors do not look like what they are - impertinent foreigners who interfere in our lives and corrupt our state - but like "warmhearted Jews" who support a state that belongs to them as well.

Gideon Levy has recently written an article in which he begged them to "leave us alone". Being a less refined person than he, I shall say this in a ruder way: Go home and take your money with you. We are not for sale. Stop trying to manage our life (and death)!

There is nothing more dangerous than a resourceful idiot ….Scott Adams

Is Mr. Bush the idiot who attempts to be resourceful at the expense of world citizenry?

The Bush White House with its democratic war doctrine has threatened world peace and by using coercion and threat of war is bent on depriving Iran of civilian nuclear technology, even though Iran has not violated the NPT. Yet, in a move that defies all logic, Mr. Bush has offered Saudi Arabia nuclear technology. Given the Kingdom's past attempts to gain access to nuclear weapons and its record on human rights violations, either his sanity is questionable or his motives.

According to documents released from the British National Archives under the 30 year rule (dated December 12, 1973 and marked 'UK Eyes Alpha'), it was revealed that after the 1973 war, "[that] British intelligence believed the United States was ready to take military action" that is, invade, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, "to prevent further disruption to oil supplies" and "to secure control of their oil fields".  The jittery Saudis, cognizant of a possible future invasion, offered to pay for the reconstruction of Iraq's Osirak-reactor which was destructed by Israel in 1981. As late as 1985 Iraqi and Saudi military and nuclear experts were co-operating closely, the extent of which cooperation included sending Saudi nuclear scientists to Baghdad for months of training.

Between 1985 and 1990, up to the time Saddam invaded Kuwait , payments were made on condition that some of the bombs be transferred to the Saudi arsenal. Muhammad Khilewi, the second-in-command of the Saudi mission to the United Nations Khilewi brought with him more than 10,000 documents he obtained from the Saudi Arabian Embassy. The cache included transcripts of a secret desert meeting between Saudi and Iraqi military teams a year before the invasion of Kuwait . The transcripts depict the Saudis funding the nuclear program and handing over specialized equipment that Iraq could not have obtained elsewhere.

The defector's documents also showed that Riyadh had paid for Pakistan's bomb project and signed a pact that if Saudi Arabia were attacked with nuclear weapons, Pakistan would respond against the aggressor with its own nuclear arsenal. What Khilewi did not know was that the Fahd-Saddam nuclear project was also a closely held secret in Washington . According to a former high-ranking American diplomat, the CIA was fully apprised. The funding stopped only at the outbreak of the Gulf War in 1991. The fact that the CIA was aware of this, could explain why Khilewi was not granted federal protection when he abandoned his UN post and became an opponent in late June 1994.

Given that Saudi Arabia is a pariah state like Israel and attempted to obtain a nuclear bomb, much like Israel , perhaps the logic lies in their penchant for democracy that makes it acceptable for Bush to give them nuclear technology. Israel , a democracy for Jews only, violates the rights of Muslims and Christians, the latest such incident being orthodox Jews setting fire to hundreds of copies of the New Testament in an act of violence against Christian missionaries. Saudi Arabia has no tolerance for any religion other than Islam. In that women have no rights and political dissent is punishable in Saudi Arabia, should not stand in the way of this ally having a nuke; especially since their backdoor friendship with Israel is invaluable.

Aside from the glamorous Plaza hotel in N.Y., co-owned by Israel 's Elad Group and the Saudi-based Kingdom Holding Co., the neoconservative's propaganda machine certainly makes the Saudis a trustworthy partner – in some corners. In early September 2005, Bin Talal bought 5.46% of voting shares in News Corp. This made the Fifth richest man on the Forbes World's Richest People, the fourth largest voting shareholder in News Corp., the parent of Fox News. News Corp. is the world's leading newspaper publisher in English. Saudi Prince al-Waleed bin Talal boasted in Dubai his ability to change the news content that viewers around the world see on television. No doubt with their nukes, they will be able to change a great deal more! The pertinent question is, what has been changed thus far for this White House to give nukes to an oppressive regime, known to have pursued nuclear bombs, and with a history of terrorism, be it training the Taliban or allegedly, or to have a tendency to send over terrorists, the 15 or the 19 hijackers on 9/11 and spread Wahhabism?

In 2004, after the illegal invasion of Iraq , a foundation was created and controlled by a consortium in which the key players were the Carlyle Group and the Albright Group. The purpose of the consortium was to secretly transfer some $57billion Iraqi debt owed to the government of Kuwait after the invasion. Under this deal, $2billion would be given to the consortium with half of it going to Carlyle. This was not an easy task as the time the world was willing to forgive Iraq's debt for reconstruction and the consortium had offered to use its 'influence' to 'maximize Kuwait 's debt collection (Nation). Carlyle's benefits were endless.

During the 2006 war, while Israel bombed Lebanon, Carlyle profited greatly – as did the Saudis, the U.S. , and of course, Israeli. The systematic destruction [of the Middle East 's only democracy] translated into significant opportunity for the Carlyle Group and with the 'crisis, they announced a $1.3 billion fund for investment in the region. They were not alone. The rush was on. The big investment banks -- Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers – all increased their presence in the region. Israel, the perpetrator as the benefactor, received an increase of USD 500 million additional in aid package from the U.S. in September of the same year (Ynet news).

And was it not wondrous indeed that John Bolton was able to hold off the United Nations Security Council for 33 days and nights before a cease-fire could finally be declared?

Perhaps for more importantly for the Bush administration and Israeli hardliners, the Saudi rulers are fulfilling their ultimate desire – the destruction if Islam. These fanatic Wahhabis are destroying the birth place of Mohammad and all traces of it, and replacing it with parking lots. The same oil-rich orthodoxy that pumped money into the Taliban as they prepared to destroy the Bamiyan buddhas in 2000 is now destroying Islam's two holiest cities, Mecca and Medina, which date back to the lifetime of the Prophet Mohammad1,400 years ago. This is the highest cooperation possible from an ally, well deserving of nukes.

While the Saudis are being rewarded for their cooperation, they must remember that prior to the 1979 Iranian revolution, the Shah was an ally who cooperated with the United States and Israel . His oppressive regime was given nuclear technology too. Today, in spite of its peaceful use, the civilian technology is being used to declare war on Iran . The Saudis who are fond of $5 million diamond covered Mercedes while the Palestinians are being incarcerated and starved, should be mindful their friendship will not be for long. After all, they are sitting on top of the world's biggest oil reserve; and Mr. Bush is not the idiot we think he is.

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is an Iranian-American studying at the University of Southern California , Los Angeles . She is a member of World Association of International Studies society, Stanford. Her research focus is U.S. foreign policy and the influence of lobby groups. She is a peace activist, essayist, radio commentator and public speaker.

BY: MUHAMMAD DAUD MIRAKI, Director Afghan DU & Recovery Fund
It is interesting that people describe different periods in history with existing adjectives in use in each respective period. To judge an era as either beneficial or harmful, people in different periods in time used their respective linguistic terms such as good, comfortable, bad and evil describing the ambiance created by a regime, ruler or empire. Rarely, have people resorted to events as descriptive indicators of their experience in a particular period in time; instead, they used linguistic means, namely, adjectives in describing some period in history as either good or bad. The reason for this is that each period in history has established terminology in use denoting the events, phenomena and social reality around them. For example, the Stalin era could easily be described by words such as evil, or Stalin and his crimes could easily be viewed as manifestation of evil. Although American academics of the Jewish faith have used 'holocaust' describing the mass murders of Stalin's era as a type of descriptive synonym equivalent to the Jewish experience under the Nazis. To my knowledge, no one has used one current event or social phenomenon in place of existing adjective as a type of antonym trying to describe another current event, until now. The reason that compels me to do so in this paper stems from the ineffectiveness of adjectives in describing our current state of affairs.

The boundless murders committed by the government of the United States under variously false pretexts make the government of the United States and its armed forces 'Killers without Borders'. The group that I chose to use as an antonym in describing the heinousness of the United States crimes worldwide is 'Doctors without Borders'. The reason I chose this group to serve as an antonym in this essay is rather straightforward. That is, 'Doctors without Borders' engage in benevolence with the sole purpose of saving lives irrespective of national borders, while, the US policy makers and armed forces serve as 'Killers without Borders' ready to murder innocent people without the slightest regard to basic human decency, national sovereignty or official borders.

The group 'Doctors without Borders' as its name connotes are doctors who do not value political and geographic borders in bringing life saving treatments and medicines to the needy whenever violence and disease have taken their toll on the poor and the disenfranchised. There are no material gains for these selfless doctors except the intangibles, feeling that they have done something good and decent amidst vast indecency in the world today. This group does not care about peoples' political affiliations, religious beliefs, national origin or ethnic descent. After all decency does not recognize the world in such clear terms as the evil portrayed and perpetrated by the United States of America. The government of the United States with the blessing of majority of its people 52% voting for Bush---have chosen the role of a gigantic mass killer aimed at satisfying its lust for material gains and imposing sheer pain on other people, who choose to be different.

Similar to 'Doctors without Borders', the United States does not recognize borders, however, contrary to the 'Doctors without Borders', the US does not aim at helping the poor and the needy, instead, it targets the weak militarily, depriving people of lives worldwide under the false banner of democracy and liberation.

Strategies of the Killers Without Borders

The Uniquely effective Use of the Word 'Democracy' : The significance of language as the crucial tool in human existence can not be looked at as a mere tool of communication. Language does not only serve as a tool of communication, but it also plays a crucial role as a major component of social structure. What I mean by social structure is any relatively stable pattern of social behavior. Hence, the function of language is much broader than is apparent at the outset. It is essential to realize that language is the tool of socialization and an effective tool of dissemination and diffusion of culture. Since culture does not remain still, the agents of socialization along with tools of socialization adjust accordingly. Agents of socialization are families, schools, peer groups, and media; they change with the passage of time as is evident for every adult in his/her middle age. What used to be 'cool' at their youth is no longer cool at adulthood. The use and meaning of some words are appropriate at certain point in one's life, but they lose their meaning from the intended with passage of years and decades. This is especially true for various descriptive jargons and phrases used by colonial powers describing their political and economic intent of subjugation of the conquered people in different parts of the world. For example, when Napoleon entered Egypt, he portrayed himself as someone who had come to civilize the Egyptian or for that matter any other people. Hence, Napoleon saw himself as a liberator than an occupier. The pertinent phrases of the early European powers were christianization and civilization. These words were appropriate from the perspective of the colonial powers in that time, after all, 'what was good for the Europeans had to be good for everybody else in the world'. Thus, the imposition of values and denigration of other cultures and religions are nothing unique to the current global hegemon, the United States, but rather inherited from its European predecessors.

With the advent of the British Empire, the above-mentioned phrases were still in use but were used selectively in different parts of the world. For example, in regions where Islam was the dominant religion the phrase christianization would be dropped and instead, they would use the phrase civilization and modernization, respectively. Slowly, civilization as the choice jargon would be almost entirely replaced by modernization and modernity and technology. Incidentally, every colonial power's aim was to obtain raw materials from the conquered regions, and then the resultant manufactured goods would be transported back to the conquered regions and sold to the populations there. What could be more profitable than this, especially, when raw natural resources are secured for free? It is worth mentioning that the British would also employ the corrupt elite in the conquered lands and use these influential locals as front in dealing with the population. Today, we see the same thing with a different form.

The United States copied some of the methods of the British; however, the US is much more efficient in portraying falsehood under the guise of phrases that are valued every where. As I mentioned that different deceptive phrases were used by colonial powers in different times and places, the phrases the US chose are democracy, liberty and freedom. These phrases are significant worldwide and transcend national borders and different regions. After all, these phrases envisage fundamental human necessities and god granted rights. However, these phrases would not find meaning unless presented in tangible manner to the conquered people and people worldwide. This is when local puppets from the region that have sold out and chose to exchange their dignity for some dirty dollars and authority, become tools of dissemination and diffusion of falsehood. This is similar to the British practice, but much more sophisticated. The sophistication of the mechanism the US uses is not really the invention of the United States but rather it is the consequence of globalization, which made travel from different parts of the world easy and facilitated opportunities for foreign nationals to receive education or seek employment. These foreign nationals became ideal instruments of manipulation. Although they chose to sell themselves out for prospects of power and money, they also serve as an effective smoke screen for the conquered region. For example, in Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, who was an asset of the US intelligence agencies, the CIA especially, served as a tool of the US hegemony; thus, he provided the tangibility needed behind the phrases democracy, liberty, and freedom.

How this works is rather effective. The effectiveness is two folds and has two groups of consumers, local and global.

1) The use of the word democracy manifests legitimacy in the eyes of subjugated local people and portrays a glimpse of hope for the future of local people. This is especially true when the subjected population has suffered either from induced civil wars, such as in Afghanistan orchestrated by the CIA after 1992 or from US installed and supported dictators, such as Saddam Hussein of Iraq.

2) The US attempts to use democracy as a vehicle of legitimacy to audience worldwide as if though people worldwide were ignorant had narrow sources of information as do Americans by being glued to their television sets.

The appointment of Karzai in Afghanistan and Alawi in Iraq are portrayed to the world as fruits of US foreign policy success. Now let's explore what these fruits of democracy have brought to their respective regions.

In Afghanistan, there are thousands more widows today than there were before the US invasion. There are more than 32,000 Afghan civilians - a conservative number - who have lost their lives to the US bombing. This number reflects only those victims who lost their lives from October 7, 2001 to the first three months of 2002. Moreover, there are thousands more orphans today than before the US invasion. These orphans are roaming Afghan streets and alleys, sleeping in cemeteries and bombed buildings, only to die from cold weather and disease. The other dreadful consequence for these orphans is the high rate of kidnapping. These orphans are kidnapped and then sold into slavery and prostitution or they serve as candidates for harvesting human organs to be sold to the highest bidder. Orphans are not the only ones that are kidnapped, but rather, due to the insecurity in different parts of the country, criminals target children of various backgrounds for these heinous purposes. Another tragedy that dwarfs all others is the heavy contamination of Afghanistan with uranium isotopes after the US used bunker-buster bombs and cannons using uranium projectiles. This incidentally is the "gift" that keeps on giving since uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, a perpetual death sentence has been imposed on the entire nation.

Words to Convey Action: Besides being a tool of communications, language also serves as the most effective tool in conveying action. After all had it not been for language how would one distinguish an evil deed from a good one? Incidentally, it brings fort the argument of chicken and egg, whether language existed first or actions and circumstances contributed to the evolution of language. This essay is certainly not the place to argue the anthropological and philosophical aspects of this issue. However, some individuals argue that action itself is a tool of communication. If this assertion were true, could one imagine what would one person do in order to show another person to distinguish a good deed from an evil one? Perhaps, the first person would have to kill another person to convey evil, while feed another to envisage what he/she means by good. But thankfully, we have been blessed with languages as effective tools of communications.

In addition to the primary function of language, language also serves as a vehicle for the conveyance of action through the use of common as well as technical words. These words could convey action either explicitly or implicitly. We use and interpret action from spoken words on daily basis. For example, if I said that I will drive to nearby town, I have explicitly expressed my intentions, however, if I said, the nearby town is a good place to work, the listeners could deduce that I might be looking for work in the nearby town. Moreover, one needs not to use long sentences to illustrate a particular action; instead, an effective use of key words is ample to establish an intended action. This is evident in the rhetoric of this administration trying to envisage righteousness. When GW Bush used the word tyranny in his speech, he wanted to imply to the public that his actions are those of a liberator not of an oppressor. Bush and his flock of cowards used the biblical words of good and evil in his first term, again trying to distinguish himself as a god-fearing man going after evil individuals.

The continuous use of these words has conditioned the American public in an effective manner. Since Americans are glued to their television sets and their entire worldview comes from television, they become truly the ideal mass sheep to be conditioned and used in ways that they would not acknowledge being part of.

Shameless Media Pundits: The most complicit in this global murder is the US corporate media and the shameless so-called journalists and experts. Sometimes one can not help but to ask how degrading a human being becomes in order to earn a living. Perhaps, earning a living is not the issue, but rather being part of a mass deception is a complex game of flawed semblance and semantics. But amidst this tragedy of murder and deception, one discovers how low a massive industry and individuals stoop for material gains. This fact becomes apparent when reporters from large media outlets and newspapers talk on shows or express themselves in writing.

Incidentally, I was watching the Charlie Rose Show when Thomas Freedman of the New York Times appeared on his show to discuss the Iraqi election. When he was talking about the United States occupation of Iraq, he would use his index fingers in the air to present occupation in a quotation mark, illustrating as if this "occupation" is not really "occupation" but rather liberation, yes liberation. Furthermore, the same cowards of the US and Western media would not dare to report facts, in fact, they are the vehicles whereupon the conditioning mechanism succeeds in this country. This, off course, does not exonerate the American consumers; after all, they have alternative media Internet, library, but more than anything else they have their brain to rely on.

When the CIA dog, Johnny Spann lost his life in the prison uprising in Northern Afghanistan, the media was talking about this character continuously. In fact, his widow was invited to the State of the Union. When confronted by reporters, the family of this CIA agent wished the other American, John Walker Lindh - 'the American Taliban' - to be punished to the fullest extent of the law. These people fail to realize what was their son the CIA agent - doing in Afghanistan in the first place? Perhaps, one of the readers would say that the reason US invaded Afghanistan was because Bin Laden attacked the US, and the Taliban gave him sanctuary. There is no need for me to debate that point here. Those that are curious should know that it is amply established that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were part of an inside job aimed at facilitating global hegemony. But the US media could care less that more than 1200 young men were slaughtered by the US B-52 bombing in the prison uprising and another 3500 lost their lives by being sealed into transport containers in northern Afghanistan. The containers were shot when the prisoners screamed for air and water, and their bodies were dumped in Dasht-e-Lailia desert in Northern Afghanistan.

Another example of media's cowardliness is the reporting of conflict in Palestine. When Israelis entered the Jenin Refugee Camp, where they killed civilians, destroyed their houses and deprived them of food and water, the coward media outlets were exhibiting sorrow for the loss of 13 Israeli soldiers, not the poor Palestinian refugees. This discussion went on until the Palestinian spokeswoman Hanan Ashrawi was shocked and questioned the decency of the television reporter and other American analysts on that show. This dirty game wherein Muslim men and women lose their lives in the hands of few mass murderers in Washington and London is a well calculated scheme concocted by morally corrupt academics at US academic institutions in order to justify what amounts to world domination.

Corruption As An Effective Tool: Moreover, another ironic tool that these Killers without Borders, use is that of corruption. It is a sociological fact that in order to control a family, one has to introduce corruption into the family and expose the family members to corrupt and degenerative behavior. Once that occurs, the family disintegrates by itself. Hence, corruption and collapse of moral values serve instruments of family disintegration. Family disintegration brings about what the 19th century French Sociologist Emile Durkheim would refer to as anomie. This is especially true in Kabul. The use of money and consumerism and opportunities for prostitution, drinking, gambling and other degenerate activities have brought about textbook sociological situations that have facilitated the disintegration of the basic institution of society, namely family.

This method is very effective among the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara minority communities. The reason for the failure of the material enticement among the Pashtuns Afghans Afghanistan’s major ethnic group is the strong traditional family values and the rigid enforcement of those values among Pashtun households. For example, if a Pashtun woman compromised her dignity, the only outcome she would certainly encounter would be death because indignity is one among a handful things Pashtuns can not tolerate in their lives, and that is why, they are very protective of the female members of their family.

The classic mechanism the Americans and their coward allies use is the mechanism of luring females into training and job creation. Most of the time these women would end up in a US military base where they supposedly would get training, instead, they encounter funsex, drinking and partying. Tajiks are extremely susceptible to the aforementioned degenerate activities, but they also include Uzbek, Qazel Bash, and a few Hazara women.

There are 5 to 6 porn cable television channels free of charge available from 11 PM until 6 AM. The youngsters watch these movies and become immune to the whole notion of immorality associated with such behaviors. In addition, prostitute houses from India, Turkey, China and Thailand among others opened outlets in Kabul. These prostitute houses facilitate opportunities for young men who watch porn on television, to try to rob or engage in some other deviant behavior to come up with the needed money for attending these brothels.

The magnitude of deviation and corruption is so acute that no where in the world has the sex pill Viagra been so much in demand as in Kabul. Furthermore, condom manufacturers have sponsored radio station in order to increase its sale margin. The best democracy one could fuck, as one individual said.

Divide & Conquer - Another Tool: The instrument of divide and conquer is also employed in Afghanistan that is evident in the rhetoric of Karzai and his American handlers in naming some Taliban as moderate while others as extremists. It is also important to keep in mind that the Americans used the principle of divide and conquer effectively in using one ethnic group against another whereby they put in motion the electoral processes. In order to understand how these processes were put in motion some concise background is in order. Since Afghanistan is a multiethnic society, the fear of domination of one ethnic group over the other serves as an effective tool in luring ethnic groups to engage in actions that would impede the other ethnic groups from undermining their rights.

After the fall of the Soviet installed puppet regime in 1992, the subsequent infighting was fought along ethnic lines, although for strategic purposes alliances between opposing ethnic groups did take place. However, for the most part, the minority groups Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara dominated the post-1992 government in Kabul, and they resorted to targeting the Pashtun population in Kabul and in the north; thus, undermining them as a majority. Although Pashtuns also took to revenge and retaliatory measures during this era, which was followed by the emergence of Taliban as a reaction to the blatant violations committed by the minority groups. This period struck a severe blow to the Pashtuns' ego and their pride. The situation became worse when the Taliban regime collapsed. This was yet another blow to the Pashtuns' identity, especially that the Northern Alliance--composed of the same minority ethnic groups that dominated the post-1992 regime--played a key role in the US anti-Taliban campaign. The Bush administration took advantage of the dynamics at hand and played the majority against the minorities and vice versa. In light of the lengthy hostilities, Pashtuns had to 'sell their soul to the devil' and participate in the mock election and vote for the puppet Hamid Karzai even though he is America's stooge. The difficult decision Pashtuns in Afghanistan took was based on keeping the minorities at bay; otherwise, the minorities would have occupied the position of authority. This was indeed the proverbial double edge sword.

Therefore, inter-group conflicts along the mocked symbols of legitimacy, namely, election/democracy and the blunt use of force are some of the tricks of these 'Killers without Borders'.

However, the US officials are quite amateurish in their view of Afghanistan; they fail to comprehend Afghan history. For a foreign power to fail and bog down in Afghanistan, there need not be large armies of resistance, instead, effective groups of resistance break foreign enemies incrementally through attrition until they are too frail to get up.

The situation in Iraq is equally dim. According to a study by the British Journal of Medicine, the Lancet, more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians lost their lives subsequent to the US-British invasion of Iraq. In addition, thousands of widows and orphans are the byproduct of this cowardly invasion. Though the uranium contamination was prevalent after the first Gulf War, it has become much worse after this second invasion and occupation. Iraqi women are forced into prostitution either by hunger and homelessness brought on by the US. Criminal elements roam around the country eager to make money even if they sell women's dignity. Oh, I almost forgot, this should not matter to the US since this is considered freedom for women and women rights. Another uncharacteristic situation in Iraq has been the widespread sale and use of illicit drugs. There were never any trade or consumption of illicit drugs in Iraq. On the same token, opium and heroin were wiped out by religious decree under the Taliban regime, but now, drug production in Afghanistan has gone up exponentially alarming the United Nations to the extent to forecast a dim future for Afghanistan since it had edged upon becoming a narco-state. The drugs produced in Afghanistan, are transported by the US intelligence and military agencies to different parts of the world including Iraq, where a drugs market has emerged that serves not only Iraqi addicts but also transported to the Gulf States including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other oil rich nations.

Why Killers Without Borders?  The reason I chose to call this article 'Killers without Borders' stems from the methods of killings. These methods are as follows:

1. The invasion of another sovereign nation is the blatant violation of international law, which the US government has no regards for. Since the fall of the former Soviet Union, the US has become the sole superpower. This status entails military, economic and consequently political weights. As usual, the US abuses its economic and military power for political gains in the United Nations as it was apparent in the wake of the Iraq war. At that time, the Bush administration was blatantly intimidating and bribing smaller nations and fail to even acknowledge the existence of its European allies. In the European arena, Bush's poodle, Tony Blair did the necessary barking. It is important to keep in mind that it is no surprise that the US is not a signatory to the International Criminal Court; had it been a signatory to the court, the US government would have been one of the most visible defendants tried for war crimes.

2. The second aspect is dependent upon the first one for the most part. Due to the economic and military might of the United States, other nations are eager to accommodate their airspace for the US fighter jets and rockets. Some nation-states such as Pakistan--which is nothing but an overused and undervalued prostitute pleasing the US government--would not even require the US armed forces to ask for permission. Therefore, the US jet fighters and tomahawk missiles crisscross national borders as if they did not exist. After all, 'everyone' wants to be on the good side of the global killer.

3. In this process to please the US's imperialist ventures, smaller nations target their own citizens suspected to be against the American aggression. This was especially evident in the case of Pakistan. As I mentioned, Pakistan as a country and its establishment constitute the omnipresent prostitute to please the US government. Thus, it was no surprise when a US State Department official stated publicly that a Pakistani would sell his mother for a few dollars.

4. The fourth characteristic of the 'Killers without Borders' is the facilitation of opportunities for other corrupt regimes to oppress domestic opposition and murder many under the rubric of some concocted legitimacy. For example, in light of the so-called 'war on terror', regimes worldwide have found easy ways to get rid of individuals deemed political troublemakers. The government of Uzbekistan, China, Russia and Algiers have used the label of the war on terror, to suppress and prosecute oppositions.

5. The fifth aspect of the 'Killers without Borders' is the use of the weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Specifically, the use of uranium munitions--bunker-buster bombs, canon rounds and projectiles--not only contaminate the land where they are used but also contaminate neighboring countries. Since uranium alloy used in these weapons pulverizes upon impact, it becomes aerosol. This way the dust becomes susceptible to wind pattern and water flow. Since wind and water are not confined to a geographic area bound by political borders, people across borders become ill and die.

6. The US's indiscriminate bombings force people to abandon their homelands and become refugees in a neighboring countries. In the process of displacement, refugees die on all sides of borders, as it was evident in the case of Afghanistan when the US started bombing. Furthermore, for the thousands forced to flee their homes, survival becomes the only issue. Hence, to survive, people resort to disparate actions, which sometimes result in the loss of lives in the host country. So, death is brought upon the victim population in different forms.

Killers share certain universal characteristics--by no means exhaustive--that include disregard for the victim, considering the victim less human, rationalizing their crimes among many other characteristics. A killer could have many motives for perpetrating his/her inhumane and gruesome action. The motives could initially not be murder but rather another degenerate undertaking such as robbery, sexual attack, or simply an argument had gone sour and the individual enraged and reacted in an miscalculated manner, killing the other individual. When there are actual motives for murder, they could range from revenge to utter hatred of the targeted person. In some instances, an individual might be a psychotic, and some schizophrenic urges might have resulted in heinous actions. The above-mentioned scenarios would happen in a defined geographic location, wherein the offender(s) might reside. The crime committed by individuals in their own respective enclaves, confine them within the bounds of legal infrastructure of that enclave. When murder is committed in a defined geographic location, the offender could be held accountable for committing murder under defined local laws. The guilt of the person is defined by the action of murder alone. In the case of the United States, the mechanism of murder is obviously different but is also heinous, complex and boundless, and is not subject to any legal imperatives since it does not value any rule of law including its own.

Hence, the US forces and supporters as 'Killers without Borders' are different from common murderers in certain specific ways. It is worth mentioning that this list is no means exhaustive.

First, the perpetration of murder by the United States is indiscriminate, brutal, and recognizes no geographic boundaries. For example, the US mercenary murderers commit their murders by targeting large number of people in a locality, followed by targeting those civilian rescuers that would attempt to help the victims of the first wave of attacks.

This practice was witnessed and reported by the UN officials and condemned when the US armed forces targeted Afghan civilians.

During the month of December, 2001, another liberation attempt was carried out by the 'brave' men of the US armed forces when they killed 52 civilians, mostly women and children in the village of Niazi Qala in Paktia province. The British newspaper, The Time published the following account of the tragedy:

"non-combatant women and children were chased and killed by U.S. helicopters during an attack on an Afghan village that left 52 dead."

According to the newspaper, in the initial strike in this village 10 women and 25 children were reported killed but later, a UN spokesperson, Stephanie Bunker said:

"After the women and children were killed in the village, a second group of civilians fled the attack and were gunned down by U.S. helicopters. All fifteen of the fleeing villagers were killed. A third group of civilians, who were trying to rescue survivors, was also killed by the U.S. military according to Ms. Bunker."

Similarly, in Jalal Abad, when the US jets bombed a mosque where people were praying, many civilians were killed at the entrance of the mosque. The survivors ran to help the wounded, however, it was not long before they were also targeted and became added numbers of collateral damage. The US forces use this practice of mass murder also in Iraq.

Second, the murders are not perpetrated in a defined time and space, but rather the use of the weapons in the murders leaves a legacy of perpetual death--killing for generations to come. This aspect of the crime of these 'Killers without Borders' is the most dreadful and heinous of all. The US armed forces rely heavily on uranium munitions. They use bunker buster bombs made of uranium alloy dropped by fighters jets and bombers, and uranium projectiles fired from the A-10 warthogs and AC-130 gunships. The heinous nature of murder through these weapons of mass destruction becomes evident in all sphere of the targeted population. In Afghanistan, the US use of bunker buster bombs has made the mountainous regions of east, southeast and southwestern parts of the country uninhabitable.

Third, the murders are committed in a very uneven plain field, wherein the victim is absolutely devoid of any means of self defense, while the US killers do not look at the nameless faces of their victims because these murderers are too much of cowards to fight face to face. Instead, they kill from 35,000 feet using B-52s.

Fourth, despite the heinousness of their crimes, the US killers are shameless to even admit their wrongdoing; on the contrary, they label their murders with descriptive terms such as liberation, freedom and democracy. In fact, after murdering thousands of innocent people, the United States wants and expects the targeted nation to acknowledge gratitude for bringing them democracy. This dirty public relation job is left to the puppets they put in place such as Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan and Allawi in Iraq.

Fifth, the US killers - Killers without Borders - unlike individual murderers in society refer to their victims as objects, namely collateral damage. Contrary to individual murderers when caught by law enforcement apologize in the sentencing phase, the US murderous government does not show any remorse. Instead, it usually releases statements barely touching the issue. For example, a White House spokesperson would say, "the United States regrets any loss of innocent life." Incidentally, when the surviving family members approach US officials asking for compensation, they are literally pushed away. For example, when widows and children approached the US embassy in Kabul expecting to be compensated for the loss of their homes---not family members---the US military personnel pushed them away.

Sixth, in countries such as Afghanistan where dignity dictates daily life, a murderer intent on taking revenge would not go after some body,s female family members because it is considered an indignity. The US mercenary murderers, who kill for money, and do not know anything about dignity, had taken Iraqi women hostage in order to force male family members to surrender. For example, in Fallujah, Iraq, the US coward armed forces went to arrest a young man who led local insurgents, however, he was not home. This prompted the US armed forces to drag the Iraqi man's sister, a young woman named Fatimah. The reason for Fatimah's arrest was to force her brother to put down arms and surrender. In the process, Fatimah along with other women in Abu Ghraib prison was raped many times. Until she wrote a letter and secretly passed it to the resistance through a third party. In that letter, she said the following:

"My brother Mujahideen in the path of God! What can I say to you? I say to you: our wombs have been filled with the children of fornication by those sons of apes and pigs who raped us. Or I could tell you that they have defaced our bodies, spit in our faces, and tore up the little copies of the Qur'an that hung around our necks? God is greatest! Can you not comprehend our situation? Is it true that you do not know what is happening to us? We are your sisters. God will be calling you to account about this tomorrow."

She continued,

"By God, we have not passed one night since we have been in prison without one of the apes and pigs jumping down upon us to rip our bodies apart with his overweening lust. And we are the ones who had guarded our virginity out of fear of God. Fear God! Kill us along with them! Destroy us along with them! Don't leave us here to let them get pleasure from raping us! It will be an act to ennoble the Throne of Almighty God. Fear God regarding us! Leave their tanks and aircraft outside. Come at us here in the prison of Abu Ghurayb."

The poor soul concludes with the following plea:

"I am your sister in God (Fatimah). They raped me on one day more than nine times. Can you comprehend? Imagine one of your sisters being raped. Why can't you all imagine it, as I am your sister. With me are 13 girls, all unmarried. All have been raped before the eyes and ears of everyone.

They won't let us pray. They took our clothes and won't let us get dressed. As I write this letter one of the girls has committed suicide. She was savagely raped. A soldier hit her on her chest and thigh after raping her. He subjected her to unbelievable torture. She beat her head against the wall of the cell until she died, for she couldn't take any more, even though suicide is forbidden in Islam. But I excuse that girl. I have hope that God will forgive her, because He is the Most Merciful of all.

Brothers, I tell you again, fear God! Kill us with them so that we might be at peace. Help! Help! Help! WaMu'tasimah!"

As a result of the emotional letter from Fatimah, her brother targeted the Abu Graib prison with rockets killing 68 American soldiers including Fatimah and other prisoners. At last, Fatimah's wish of welcoming death over the indignity that was brought upon her and other females by these Killers without Borders, the Americans.

In light of the crimes of these killers and the scope of their exploitation worldwide, the question to ask is what could be done. In the case of common murderers, law enforcement officials and police look for culprits and eventually bring them to face the consequences of their crimes. In this case, who is going to bring the US armed mercenary cowards to justice, and who is going to bring the people of this country at the least the 52% of them to justice and hold them accountable. The answer is simple, no one can because the victim nations do not have a comparable military force to take revenge; the United Nations-- and its coward Secretary General is instrument of the US's legitimacy. In fact, the misuse of international law and the United Nations as a rubber stamp are some of the ways the United States want to fool the world. Furthermore, the US refuses to become a signatory to the Court in Hague because the US government realizes that its soldiers and officials would be summoned to face their victims.

Thus, the alternative is to resort to improvisation, a poor man's weapon since the dawn of time. This improvisation is referred to as terrorism and the US and her allies saw to it to use the UN equally effective to tackle the issue of "terrorism."

Again, my question is what is the alternative? Let, me guess, write letters of complain, Right!! No, the only way a beast could be stopped in its tracks to force it to stop after all a beast does not listen to reason, if it cared about reason, would it commit such heinous crimes? Off course, not. Professor Ward Churchill provided the answer to this question, when he said that "the US needs more 911s."

Well, I have news to the United States and her government, you have dug a nasty deep hole for other people simply for being different, but be assured that you will end up in that hole and remain there until disintegrate. No one needs to do that; you as country are doing it to yourself. Everyone in the world is a spectator standing on the sideline, watching the last crawl of the United States until it crumbles.

Now let me touch upon the noble and selfless deeds of the Doctors without Borders and see how it stands against the actions of the Killers without Borders, the answer is simple. The actions of Doctors without Borders signify the best of humanity whereas those of the Killers without Borders are the lowest humanity could stoop to.

The world must stop standing idle while the people of Gaza are treated with such cruelty

BY: JIMMY CARTER

The world is witnessing a terrible human rights crime in Gaza, where a million and a half human beings are being imprisoned with almost no access to the outside world. An entire population is being brutally punished.  This gross mistreatment of the Palestinians in Gaza was escalated dramatically by Israel, with United States backing, after political candidates representing Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Authority parliament in 2006. The election was unanimously judged to be honest and fair by all international observers.

Israel and the US refused to accept the right of Palestinians to form a unity government with Hamas and Fatah and now, after internal strife, Hamas alone controls Gaza . Forty-one of the 43 victorious Hamas candidates who lived in the West Bank have been imprisoned by Israel , plus an additional 10 who assumed positions in the short-lived coalition cabinet.

Regardless of one's choice in the partisan struggle between Fatah and Hamas within occupied Palestine, we must remember that economic sanctions and restrictions on the supply of water, food, electricity and fuel are causing extreme hardship among the innocent people in Gaza , about one million of whom are refugees.

Israeli bombs and missiles periodically strike the area, causing high casualties among both militants and innocent women and children. Prior to the highly publicised killing of a woman and her four children last week, this pattern had been illustrated by a report from B'Tselem, the leading Israeli human rights organisation, which stated that 106 Palestinians were killed between February 27 and March 3. Fifty-four of them were civilians, and 25 were under 18 years of age.

On a recent trip through the Middle East , I attempted to gain a better understanding of the crisis. One of my visits was to Sderot, a community of about 20,000 in southern Israel that is frequently struck by rockets fired from nearby Gaza . I condemned these attacks as abominable acts of terrorism, since most of the 13 victims during the past seven years have been non-combatants. Subsequently, I met with leaders of Hamas - a delegation from Gaza and the top officials in Damascus . I made the same condemnation to them, and urged that they declare a unilateral ceasefire or orchestrate with Israel a mutual agreement to terminate all military action in and around Gaza for an extended period.

They responded that such action by them in the past had not been reciprocated, and they reminded me that Hamas had previously insisted on a ceasefire throughout Palestine, including Gaza and the West Bank, which Israel had refused. Hamas then made a public proposal of a mutual ceasefire restricted to Gaza , which the Israelis also rejected.

There are fervent arguments heard on both sides concerning blame for a lack of peace in the Holy Land . Israel has occupied and colonised the Palestinian West Bank, which is approximately a quarter the size of the nation of Israel as recognised by the international community. Some Israeli religious factions claim a right to the land on both sides of the Jordan river , others that their 205 settlements of some 500,000 people are necessary for "security".

All Arab nations have agreed to recognise Israel fully if it will comply with key United Nations resolutions. Hamas has agreed to accept any negotiated peace settlement between the president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and Israel 's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, provided it is approved in a referendum of the Palestinian people.

This holds promise of progress, but despite the brief fanfare and positive statements at the peace conference last November in Annapolis , the process has gone backwards. Nine thousand new Israeli housing units have been announced in Palestine; the number of roadblocks within the West Bank has increased; and the stranglehold on Gaza has been tightened.

It is one thing for other leaders to defer to the US in the crucial peace negotiations, but the world must not stand idle while innocent people are treated cruelly. It is time for strong voices in Europe, the US, Israel and elsewhere to speak out and condemn the human rights tragedy that has befallen the Palestinian people.

...Jimmy Carter is a former president of United States