The
Dubai/UAE ports deal had huge political impact because it spoke to Bush's base. It punctured their illusion that Bush and the GOP are working to keep them safe. It vividly exposed the reality, that our first MBA president values corporate profits more than he values national security, and that the GOP is the party of global business, not the party of America.
Now, Bush and the GOP are going down that same road again, but in a manner that's infinitely more dangerous. Amazingly, the reality of what's happening is largely unnoticed. No surprise: the Dubai ports deal had already been public information for months, at the time the press and public finally woke up to the significance of the story, quite strenuously but also quite abruptly and almost by accident.
Below the fold: the devastating overlooked truth.
The reality of what's happening right now, largely ignored, is devastating. Here's why. It's not just that Bush and the GOP have ravaged a country that didn't attack us on 9/11. And it's not just that Bush and the GOP let the true terrorists get away. What's actually happening goes far beyond that. Bush and the GOP are
actively sending billions of dollars of aid and highly advanced weapons to a nation that is closely tied to bin Laden, al Qaeda, and the Taliban, a nation with much closer terrorist ties than Saddam ever had, a nation currently harboring the Taliban, a nation that already possesses numerous nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them,
a nation that is arguably a heartbeat away from becoming the world's first radical Islamic nuclear power. That nation is Pakistan.
We've all heard the recent news: the creation by Pakistan of the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan, a safe haven for the Taliban. This is essentially a state-within-a-state, an area the size of New Jersey with a population of 800,000, where the Taliban has established virtual sovereignty, with the tacit approval of Musharraf. This story was front-paged by Kos, and diaried a number of times. A video version of the story is here.
In the forefront of breaking and explaining this very important news is Bill Roggio, a highly respected conservative blogger. I recommend keeping up with Roggio's posts on this topic. More helpful background is here, here and here.
Years ago, Bush and the GOP told us they had destroyed the Taliban. But they hadn't. They let the Taliban get away, and succeeded only in relocating them across the border in Pakistan. Now the Taliban are more powerful and more secure than they ever were in Afghanistan, because they are now operating under the protection of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, and are only a heartbeat away from being in control of that arsenal.
As if that's not bad enough, Bush and the GOP are taking steps to bring some of our most advanced weapons within reach of the Taliban:
Bush [recently authorized] the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan ... Pakistan initially wants to buy about two dozen aircraft, but Bush administration officials said there would be no limits on how many it could eventually purchase ... [This move by Bush] reversed 15 years of policy begun under his father. ... Former senator Larry Pressler (R-S.D.), who sponsored the 1985 law that ultimately forced the cancellation of the original F-16 sale, called Friday's decision "an atrocity" that goes against "everything the Bush administration has stood for."
This is a $5 billion deal. Does this deal enhance our safety? Of course not. On the contrary. However, it does greatly enhance corporate profits for global business.
Given that Pakistan is perhaps a heartbeat away from becoming the first radical Islamic nuclear power, sending them F-16s makes infinitely less sense than putting Dubai in charge of US ports. When Americans heard about the Dubai ports deal, they were outraged, and they put a stop to it. Americans need to know that Bush and the GOP are arming our enemies.
But there's much more to the story. To understand a fuller picture, we should start by going back a few steps.
Pakistan played a major role in creating and supporting the Taliban.
The Taliban is essentially a creation of Pakistan, via ISI (Pakistan's CIA). ISI continues to have close ties with the Taliban.
Popular support for terrorism is high in Pakistan, perhaps higher than in any other nation in the Arab/Muslim world
A Pew study which included several Muslim nations found higher support for OBL in Pakistan than anywhere else: "bin Laden is regarded favorably by 65% of Pakistanis." Only 9% viewed him unfavorably. Their views of Bush are almost precisely the reverse. The survey also found that 41% of Pakistanis "think that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are justified [sometimes or often] in order to defend Islam from its enemies."
Two notes: the study was done in early 2004, prior to Abu Ghraib, Haditha et al. Also, in Pakistan the survey sample was "predominantly urban." A survey done today, with a truly national sample, would probably show more extreme results.
Pakistan is already a radical Islamist society
Consider the case of Mukhtar Mai:
On a terrible June day three years ago, 14 men from the dominant Mastoi tribe in Meeranwalla volunteered to rape Ms Mai as a way to settle a score after her 12-year-old brother Abdul Shakoor was seen walking with a Mastoi girl. The decision on retribution had been taken by a village court to preserve tribal honour. The jirga, or council of village elders, summoned Ms Mai to apologise for her brother's sexual misdeed. When she apologised, they gang-raped her anyway.
After the atrocity was carried out, Ms Mai was paraded naked before hundreds of onlookers. Finally, her father covered her with a shawl and took her home.
Here's what happened next:
Mai was supposed to commit suicide, as this is the "proper" response from any woman who has been ruined and defiled by rape. She refused to do so, and her family stood by her. Eventually, her rapists were sentenced to death (recently reversed) and she won a monetary judgment in court that she used to open a school for girls. In the past year, she has continued to receive death threats not only from local thugs, but also from the Musharraf administration because she will not be quiet about her ordeal, which the government prefers to cover up.
The debate about rape is emblematic of Pakistan's Islamist culture, and the debate is ongoing (The Telegraph, 8/25/06):
President Pervez Musharraf has opened a new and especially bitter confrontation with radical Islam by trying to rewrite Pakistan's controversial rape laws.
These place an almost impossible burden of proof on women by compelling them to produce four "pious" male witnesses to prove rape [note: the witnesses must testify that they witnessed penetration] or risk being convicted of adultery and face 100 lashes or death by stoning.
This law, known as the Hudood Ordinance, has been regarded as untouchable since its passage 27 years ago.
It also sets no minimum age for sex with girls, saying only that they should have reached puberty. A powerful militant Muslim lobby regards this code as sacred and based on Koranic texts and sharia law. No previous Pakistani leader, not even the country's first female leader, Benazir Bhutto, dared reform it.
But Gen Musharraf's allies in parliament sparked the fury of the militant opposition by introducing a Women Protection Bill. This would remove the requirement for four male witnesses to prove rape and set 16 as the age of consent for sex with girls.
When this measure came before parliament, Islamic radicals responded by tearing up copies of the bill and storming out. "This bill is against the Holy Koran," said Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the leader of the militant opposition. "We reject it and will try to block it in any possible manner." Other MPs chanted "death to Musharraf" and "Allah is great." ...
Until now the general, who has survived three assassination attempts by radical Islamic groups, has preferred to avoid confrontation over an issue that has not, despite an unprecedented publicity drive by the government, caught the popular imagination.
"How can a dictator propped up by the West introduce democratic reforms?" asked Hazat Aman, an official of a social welfare group run by the hardline Islamic Jamaat-i-Islami party. "It is an attack on Islam," he said.
The issue has not "caught the popular imagination!" Imagine that.
Another indication that Pakistan is already a radical Islamist society is evident in the popular support being given to Islamist leaders, like Maulana Fazlur Rahman, mentioned in the story above. More on him below.
Bush treats Musharraf as a trustworthy ally, even though Musharraf has signaled to his people that "his decision to line up with the U.S. was a temporary expedient"
While his rival Rahman openly expresses support for the Taliban, Musharaff is more subtle. He has a track record of speaking with two voices. One is heard by his people. The other is heard by the West. Arafat was famous for doing this.
Recently the LA Times noted an example of this. Musharraf delivered a message to his people, a message he hoped the West would ignore, a message the West did indeed largely ignore: "[On 9/19/01 Musharraf] spoke to his people in Urdu and reassured Pakistanis who sympathized with Al Qaeda and the Taliban that his decision to line up with the U.S. was a temporary expedient."
Conservative writer Mark Steyn recently noted that same speech: "he cited the Charter of Medina (which the Prophet Muhammad signed after an earlier spot of bother) as an attempt to justify providing assistance to the infidel." Further insight into that cultural reference ("Medina") can be found here.
The full text of the speech is here.
Musharaff's political and physical survival is precarious
Musharraf will probably not die of old age. It's more likely that he will lose his head. Here's some recent news from Pakistan (AP, 9/6/06):
More than 5,000 supporters of an Islamic religious alliance rallied ... demanding ... Musharraf step down. ... Chanting "Death to Musharraf, death to America," the supporters of the coalition of six hardline groups gathered in a public park ... Security was tight and 1,200 policemen were deployed to guard the rally ... more than 5,000 people participated in the rally. ... The ... United Action Forum alliance became a strong anti-Musharraf voice in Parliament after making gains in elections in 2002. The alliance won support in the vote mainly on a platform of opposition to Musharraf and the U.S. ... Many parties in the coalition had close ties with the Taliban.
As ChicagoDem concisely said, "[Pakistan is] balanced precariously on the precipice of outright Islamist rule."
Whether Musharraf loses his job via violence or via a vote, his successor is likely to be a radical Islamist
If something unfortunate were to happen to Musharraf, a leading candidate to replace him is Maulana Fazlur Rahman:
[Rahman is a] pro-Taleban cleric ... [who has] emerged as one of the two main contenders for the post of the country's prime minister ... [Rahman] is known for his close ties to Afghanistan's ousted Taliban regime ... His is one of the most influential and resourceful organisations in Pakistan working for what is described as a 'pure, Islamic state'. ... When US and allied forces began bombing Taleban strongholds in Afghanistan last year [these words were written on 11/6/02], Fazlur Rahman led large anti-US, anti-Musharraf, and pro-Taleban rallies in Pakistan's major cities. ... The Maulana fiercely criticised Presidents Bush and Musharraf, and threatened to launch a jihad, - a holy war - against the US if the bombings continued. ... He warned that General Musharraf would be overthrown if he continued supporting the US ... "
We purport to support democracy, but we have to face this fact: a free election in Pakistan would almost certainly result in a radical Islamic government, equipped with nuclear weapons. This would be similar to the democratic rise of Hamas and Hezbollah, except infinitely more dangerous. Trouble is, even in the absence of an election, Pakistan's next ruler is very likely to be a radical Islamist. That's why Americans must rise up and prevent Bush and the GOP from arming our enemies.
Pakistan possesses formidable military power
The Taliban used to be a shadow power in Afghanistan. Now the Taliban is a shadow power in Pakistan. This is like upgrading from a cap pistol to an ICBM. By chasing the Taliban from Afghanistan back into Pakistan (I say "back" because they originated in Pakistan) we simply moved them closer, both geographically and politically, to a formidable arsenal, both nuclear and conventional. More on Pakistan's military here ("the world's 7th largest armed force").
The opium connection: staggering piles of drug money make the Taliban more dangerous than ever
The opium situation is appalling. Afghanistan is now producing more opium than the previous record high for total world production. The government is in on it, and the money is financing the bad guys:
Afghanistan's world-leading opium cultivation rose a "staggering" 59 percent this year ... The record crop yielded 6,100 tons of opium, or enough to make 610 tons of heroin -- outstripping the demand of the world's heroin users by a third ... The trade already accounts for at least 35 percent of Afghanistan's economy, financing warlords and insurgents. ... the area under poppy cultivation in Afghanistan reached 407,700 acres in 2006, up 59 percent from 257,000 acres in 2005. The previous high was 323,700 acres in 2004. ... The estimated yield of 6,100 tons of opium resin ... is up 49 percent from 4,100 tons last year, and exceeds the previous high for total global output of 5,764 tons recorded in 1999. ... Last year, about 450 tons of heroin was consumed worldwide, 90 percent of it from Afghanistan ... In an indication of the alarming extent of official complicity in the trade, a Western counternarcotics official said about 25,000 to 30,000 acres of government land in Helmand was used to cultivate opium poppies this year. ... police and government officials are involved in cultivating poppies, providing protection for growers or taking bribes to ensure the crops aren't destroyed. ... the Taliban -- which managed to nearly eradicate Afghanistan's poppy crop in 2001, just before their ouster for giving refuge to Osama bin Laden -- now profit from the trade. In some instances, drug traffickers have provided vehicles and money to the Taliban to carry out terrorist attacks ...
Bush/GOP policy has led directly to the following chilling result: the Taliban is now richer, more popular, and more secure than ever.
When Westerners drive, we are financing our enemies. Likewise for when we shoot up.
By the way, the "war on drugs" greatly drives up the price of opium (although it obviously does not stop the production or use of it). To the extent that we adopt saner approaches to the problems of drug use, we dry up the Taliban's financing.
Musharraf's highly mortal neck
Here's all that stands between the Taliban, and Pakistan's modern arsenal of nuclear and conventional weapons, soon to supplemented by five billion dollars worth of F-16s: Musharraf's highly mortal neck. That's why I say that Pakistan is perhaps a heartbeat away from becoming the first radical Islamic nuclear power. And that's why I say that Bush and the GOP are arming our enemies, and all patriots must rise up to put an immediate stop to this.
A.Q.Khan, India, Iran and Libya
There are many things that could be said about Pakistan's role in nuclear proliferation. For now I'll quote verbatim from this astute comment, lifted from Bill Roggio's place (lightly edited for typos):
While posing as an ally Pakistan has proliferated nuclear weapons technology to at least Iran and Libya, developed and tested continually better ballistic missile platforms for their nuclear warheads and provided a safe haven for the Taliban/Al-Qa'eda since 2001.
During this period Musarraf rewarded rather than imprisoned A.Q.Khan, and held him up as a hero when he was caught spreading WMD. Khan didn't tells us that he had helped Libya's nuclear program, Mohammar Qadaffi did.
[By] interceding on Pakistan's behalf with India when India was under continued attacks by ISI backed terrorists, the U.S. has driven India deeper into Russia's client/patron relationship.
Sleeping with the enemy
Bush and the GOP are arming our enemies. But Musharraf is not the only example of how Bush and the GOP betray American security by embracing those who are tied to terrorism.
How are these three things alike: Pakistan, UAE, Saudi Arabia? As of 9/11/01, they are the only countries in the world that recognized the Taliban. How else are they alike? In all three cases, there are blatant examples of Bush and the GOP enthusiastically providing comfort and support to these regimes.
Bush's track record with these three nations is a trifecta of betrayal, of putting the interests of global business ahead of the interests of American security.
And it doesn't stop there. Our new main man in Iraq, Maliki, has close ties to Hezbollah. More on this below.
The GOP's Frankenstein syndrome
The GOP has a long track record of creating and embracing thugs, who later become our enemies.
The GOP armed OBL because he was our ally against the Russians. (Carter started this, but Reagan did much more.) But then OBL became our enemy.
Then the GOP armed Saddam because he was our ally against Iran. But then Saddam became our enemy.
Now Bush and the GOP are arming Musharraf, because he's our ally against OBL. Wait a minute! He just surrendered to OBL, and gave OBL virtual sovereignty over the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan. So now we have to realize that Musharraf is our enemy. WTF!
Of course Bush and the GOP are also supporting Maliki, because he's our ally against "the terrorists." Wait a minute! Maliki is in bed with Hezbollah. WTF!
Ignorance, feigned or otherwise
There is a theme of great surprise on the part of the Bushists, when they hear about certain things. When asked about developments in Waziristan, a White House spokesman said he was "really quite surprised" (shocked!) to learn that Musharraf and OBL are pals after all.
Speaking of pals, everyone now knows that Maliki is cozy with Hezbollah (Maliki was an officer in the Dawa party, which is closely tied to Hezbollah). This is so clear that even Andy McCarthy at National Review has detailed this long-standing connection, and pointed out that Maliki is "cozying up to Iran, Hezbollah and Sadr."
But the best part is what Hadley said about this:
Asked later about Dawa's ties to Hezbollah, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said he was unaware there was a relationship.
What we have here are people who are ignorant about things they should not be ignorant about. Is it phony ignorance? Who knows.
Speaking of phony ignorance, here's an example of what is undoubtedly the real thing:
You may remember during the 2000 campaign an enterprising journalist sprung on Gov. Bush a sudden pop quiz of world leaders. Bush, invited to name the leader of Pakistan, was unable to.
Even wingnuts are starting to realize that maybe next time we should hire someone who actually reads a newspaper every once in a while.
Bush and the GOP. Bush and the GOP.
I keep saying "Bush and the GOP" because they have been joined at the hip. Let's keep it that way, and they can all go down together.
Electoral politics
Democrats and independents already know the score. For the most part, we know that they will vote, and we know how they will vote. The issue is Bush's base, the hardcore wingnuts. This is the question: will they vote, or will they stay home? This is the kind of issue that will motivate them to stay home.
WE'RE NOT SAFE WITH OUR GOVERNMENT IN GOP HANDS, BECAUSE THEY DON'T TAKE THE TERRORIST THREAT SERIOUSLY
Bush and the GOP are two-faced. They talk a good line about the serious threats we face, but their actions show that they value global business more than they value American security. What kind of party would put American ports in the hands of Dubai? The party of global business would do that, not the party of America. What kind of party would deliver F-16s to within reach of the Taliban? The party of global business would do that, not the party of America. What kind of party would arm our enemies? The party of global business would do that, not the party of America.
The GOP is the party of global business, not the party of America.
We're Democrats, which means we place American security before the interests of global business. We're Democrats, which means we take the terrorist threat seriously. We're Democrats, which means we won't rest until we put a complete stop to the aid and support our own government is providing to those who create, harbor and encourage terrorists.
Dumbing down
Everyone now end then we find ourselves communicating with people who have trouble grasping simple concepts. Like children, or Republicans. Therefore a rebus might come in handy:
The rebus helps make clear the timeliness of this issue.