The president is waiting for
a tamed supreme court to validate his re-election but his unpopularity and
chronic misjudgments may yet defeat him
Simon Tisdall November 14, 2007 6:30 PM
Like General George Custer,
Pervez Musharraf has got himself surrounded - and he is looking for a way out.
Pakistan's famous Indian fighter, who gained prominence in the 1999 Kargil
conflict with Delhi, is under hostile fire from the opposition, the
professional classes, the judiciary, the mullahs and the media. The US,
Britain, the UN, the EU and the Commonwealth are all shooting arrows. Now even
Benazir Bhutto is demanding the general's scalp.
Bhutto, the recently
returned leader of the Pakistan People's party (PPP), had been all set for an
arranged marriage with the errant general. Under the plan, he would be civilian
president, she the prime minister. The US president, George Bush, had given his
blessing. It was all fixed - which was part of the problem.
But after being bombed,
detained, insulted and generally abused, the putative bride-to-be claims
everything is off. "It's time for him to go," she declared this week,
adding that she may boycott the planned general elections. In reality, Bhutto
was upstaged by her own supporters. She underestimated the depth of animosity
to what Sherry Rehman, the PPP spokeswoman, calls "this shabby junta"
that has created "a police state where the law of the jungle rules".
Yet time will tell whether
the split is definitive. Musharraf accused his estranged partner of being
"confrontational" and "preposterous". But in an interview
today, he said he could still work with Bhutto - and would meet one of her key
demands by standing down as army chief this month.
US leverage will be critical
as the crisis peaks. Alarmed at the myriad implications for the fight against
al-Qaida, Nato's war in Afghanistan and the US "freedom agenda", Bush
has sidelined Condoleezza Rice, whose telephone calls and advice Musharraf has
mostly ignored. Instead he has ordered John Negroponte, Rice's hard-headed
state department deputy, to lift the siege of Islamabad - and maybe patch up
the rift with Bhutto. He is expected to arrive with diplomatic guns blazing.
Diplomats predict much
arm-twisting ahead. Negroponte will try to defuse the crisis by persuading
Musharraf to end emergency rule quickly and appoint a neutral caretaker
government; by inducing Bhutto to come back to the table; and by setting a firm
election schedule - in other words, the same old plan.
One consideration driving
the US approach is that Bush, who reckons himself a good judge of men, took to
Musharraf after 9/11 and considers him a trusted friend. He will not readily abandon
him. Another consideration, as Democratic senator Joe Biden pointed out this
week, is that the White House lacks a fallback plan.
Some other options look even
less appealing, and less workable, both for Musharraf and Washington. Elections
held under martial law would lack domestic and international credibility. They
would in any case almost certainly be boycotted by the major parties. In a
worst-case scenario, they could provide an opening for the fundamentalists.
But continuing indefinitely
as things are is not an option either. Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan and other
opponents have already signalled an intention to team up with Bhutto in some
sort of "united front". That could presage ultimately uncontrollable
nationwide unrest.
Musharraf is plainly betting
that he will be able to carry on as a president in civvies and is waiting for a
tamed supreme court to validate his recent re-election. This is his equivalent
of Custer's "last stand". But his deep unpopularity, and his recent
series of chronic misjudgments, may yet defeat him. That leaves him with one
last option and one he says is considering - resignation.
If he goes, he will want
guarantees against subsequent prosecution and protection against persecution of
the kind meted out to Bhutto and Sharif. He may also find, like them, that only
exile offers such security. Speaking to Sky News, Musharraf said he would
consider quitting if "balance and stability" were assured and an
elected government were in place - even if his departure would assist those
aims.
"In my heart, I am not
a dictator," he said. "We must have elections. I must handle the
uniform issue ... Now, the choice after that is whether I should stay at all.
That option is available to me ... Maybe I take that decision, OK?"
*************************
Adam 32bans Ghaznavi
responds:
The collapse of the Petrodollar…
(Itself the geo strategic extension of the Federal Reserve a PRIVATE bank controlled by a Rothschilds led cabal that prints fiat currency it then lends the USA govt which then raises taxes to pay said loans. Eg:
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11,110:
“On June 4, 1963 President Kennedy signed this virtually unknown Presidential decree, which had the authority to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest, essentially putting the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank out of business. The order returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Johnson reversed the order shortly after taking office in November, 1963. Some conspiracy theorists believe this executive order was the cause of President Kennedy's assassination.”)
…is now so far advanced,
that it is becoming obvious that a pretext for war against Iran is desired to
bring in the (Petro) Amero/ North American Union at the point of
a smoking nuclear sixshooter – to attempt to enable a shedload of debts to be
written off, acquire vast source of cannon fodder for more Petro Amero wars
& enable the use of Mexican Zetas to round up white USA citizens `not
pulling their weight’ in `the war on terror’.
Even to many sceptical of the warnings of yours truly et
al, it will certainly become obvious, when the Fed Reserve cabal actually
attempt to execute such.
Which is why they have adopted a 2 pronged strategy of
conceptual escalation to try to establish the pretext for overt nuclear
tyranny; to control the oil/ gas of the whole world to prop up the new fiat
currency at the point of a smoking nuclear sixshooter.
Pakistan…
(plagued by the fallout from the petrodollar alliance whereby USA petrodollar regime allied themselves with Saudi monarchy, who as custodians of Mecca had to cover themselves from the threat of leftist or Islamic fascist jihadi convergence; & allied themselves with the most reactionary fascist forces by giving them vast amounts of danegeld to make trouble elsewhere. ESPECIALLY Pakistan. Eg from where, Zbigniew Brzezinski [pictured at bottom of link with Osama Bin Laden]…
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/250407_brzezinski_911.html
…orchestrated the development of the mujahadeen including one Osama Bin Laden, to draw the Russians into invading out of fear of their central Asian missile bases being over-run with jihadis)
…is being deliberately
destabilised…
As per the recipe of notorious arch neo con William Kristol
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C07%5C15%5Cstory_15-7-2007_pg7_9
…via puppet Afghan forces’…
…using their puppet (ex UNOCAL employee http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/DA29Ag02.html ) Karzai…
(pre & post 9/11, the USA regime sought control of Afghanistan as both a transit point of central Asian oil & gas AND as a panoptician from which to control the region especially to connect to bases in central Asia. To determine who gets how much oil/ gas, the better to enable USA to prop up the petrodollar.
It
was either go for broke by trying to corner the whole worlds’ oil & gas to
prop up their hyperinflated fiat currency a bit longer; or accept the crash of
the imperium. & this useless & crazy overclass were always going to opt
for the former…
This plan is in shreds as the fear of USA evaporates in Iraq, causing the central Asian strongmen to in turn turf out the USA bases & establish an alliance with Putin – hence also USA regime hostility/ desperation to remove Putin )
…as their lever against Musharraf
…strike on the Taliban
inside Pakistan 26 August 2007 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/08/27/2015593.htm
The obvious purpose being to create a fury that will lead to the overthrow of
Musharraf, which will give the USA the pretext to nuke Pakistan...
...to bring in the Amero/
NAU at the point of a smoking nuclear sixshooter...
Correspondingly, the destabilising role of Benazir `orange revolution’ Bhutto, in advocating a more stridently pro USA regime policy (eg as Musharraf’s unpopularity stems from his being seen as too close to the USA & Bhutto’s popularity stems solely from the fact that she is not General Musharraf; her role is singularly incendiary in its aspect) has compelled General Musharraf to implement emergency rule.
The purpose being to enable
the fiat currency cabal to claim to be saving humanity form the instability it
engineered itself. Furthermore, as it is BOTH less obviously a Petrodollar war
than the Iran war, AND would explode in response to the Iran war anyway, the
fiat currency regime has decided to prime Pakistan for destruction first.
It is also hoped that this would give Israel an incredible opportunity to make
a gigantic land grab in the mideast for the oilfields of Saudi Arabia, under
cover of the USA nuclear sixshooter.
Breeching the Nuclear Threshold
We know Israel was banging
on about a Syrian nuclear reactor, built by the DPRK.
We know that the alledged reactor
(or giant outhouse) was utterly destroyed in an airstrike 6 September 2007.
Map
of the area targeted (North East Syria)
http://wikimapia.org/#lat=35.706761&lon=39.833057&z=8&l=0&m=h&v=2
as
far from Israel as possible, without being too close to either Iraq or Turkey.
The following deliberately
garbled/ laundered account is from the Jpost website.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380718519&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
“The September 6 raid over Syria was carried out by the US Air Force, the Al-Jazeera Web site reported Friday. The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction.
The sources were quoted as saying that Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets provided cover for the US planes.
The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed.”
If this sounds singularly
unimpressive as a piece of sourced info, this is because of the reason for its
deployment & concerns about the consequences of such. To optimise the
benefits & minimise the potential backdraft.
Eg this looks like an
Israeli tactical mini/ micro nuke with the USAF airforce retrospectively
agreeing to cover their arse.
Saying the USAF did this
(& it makes absolutely no difference if this was a reactor, unlikely; or a
giant water closet; though Israeli intel outlets such as Debka.com had been
banging on about Syrian nuclear reactor built by North Korea) is NOT the same
as claiming the Iranians are making Jews wear yellow stars (as the Jpost had
notoriously claimed last year). Eg if the USAF don't co-operate, Israel has a
problem.
Eg this had more or less
passed out of the news. It was no longer an immediately hot issue.
It is NOW claimed the planes were carrying nuclear weapons. Presumably mini or micro nukes…
The W48 was an American Nuclear artillery shell, fired from
a standard 155 mm (6.1 inch) howitzer. It was manufactured starting in 1963,
and all units were retired in 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48
The W48 is 6.1 inches (155 mm) in diameter and 33.3 inches long.
It came in two models, Mod 0 and Mod 1, which are reported to have weighed 118
and 128 pounds respectively. It had an explosive yield equal to 72 tons of TNT
(0.072 kiloton – Hiroshima bomb was 15 Kilotons).
…specifically designed for
the purpose, with minimum residual radiation
Minimum Residual Radiation (MRR) Weapons
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/rdd-7.html#I1
Eg the main reason for the
MOAB/ MOP conventional bombs, is to blur the distinction between nuclear &
conventional weapons (the B52 needed to be reconfigured to carry the 17 ton
MOP) to make the use of mini nukes acceptable; then when the principle has been
breached, the use of 5 kiloton nukes & so on & so forth.
This is a very serious
claim.
& the claim so long
AFTER the event, reminds me of Dick Cheney's curious harping on about `If
Israel attacks Iran, the USA will come to Israel's aid'.
Curious, because (despite
the rhetoric) Israel would self evidently NOT want to do so first, because of
the obvious problem that it would be isolated & the Iran war seen clearly
as an Israeli/ Jewish war.
So this would be the OPTIMAL
minimalist way to breech the nuclear threshold (AND have the USA take
responsibility for such) & in then revealing this info so long AFTER the
event, when all has gone cold (so no immediate anti jewish riots etc), raises
the Q (most specifically to anti neo con activists), `And WHAT are you going to
DO about it?'. Eg the enemy has the psycho political advantage.
WHY NO immediate reaction at
the time?
Because as Syria is Iran's ally, the only possible reaction is immediate all out total war. So everyone had an interest in keeping schtum about this. The Syrians, Iranians, Russians & the USA/ Israelis ain't gonna say much.
So, what we have with such a
claim, is the breech of the nuclear threshold, which implicates the resistance
to Israeli led USA policy in a psycho political culture of (defeatist)
complicity if it evades/ does not pursue this issue – at least to the degree
required to counter even exploit any enemy attempt to generate such a culture
of complicity - to generate a
corresponding feedback loop; to insure that the Israeli core criminals
responsible for such an action (or even just the psyop claim) become so
politically triangulated, that they will bring utter destruction upon
themselves (in accordance with the principle of Deterrence Through Mutually
Assured Destruction) if Pakistan is nuked (after having been destabilised by
those carrying out the orders of AIPAC) to try to bring in the Amero at the
point of a nuclear sixshooter/ so enable Israeli expansionism.
AND FURTHERMORE
To repeat back in 1963 the USA had a 0.072 Kiloton (less than 1/200th of the yield of the 15 Kiloton Hiroshima bomb) MICRO nuke.
The W48 a nuclear artillery shell, fired from a standard 155 mm - 6.1 inch - howitzer. It was manufactured starting in 1963, and all units were retired in 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W48
The W48 is 6.1 inches [155 mm] in diameter and 33.3 inches long. It came in two models, Mod 0 and Mod 1, which are reported to have weighed 118 and 128 pounds respectively. It had an explosive yield equal to 72 tons of TNT [(0.072 kiloton – Hiroshima bomb was 15 Kilotons]).
The USA has been working on minimum residual radiation nukes as revealed in this declassified 2001 document on Minimum Residual Radiation (MRR) Weapons
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/rdd-7.html#I1
& recently, Ya'll MUST remember the public committment by George W Bush, (was it in 2005 or even earlier?) to develop a new generation of mini/ micro nuke `bunker busters'; which created such a furore at the time.
Well, doesn't this look awfully like the design spec you would expect from such research, ready by, well about the time the Israeli's hit that Syrian water closet...
Needless to say, such would be handed over to Israel...
...with the USAF NOW held as being responsible for such...
Pastor John Hagee (lead nutcase in the stampede to propel The Great Upside Down Shower) has just said (in a video plug for his book `In Defense of Israel') that Jesus was NOT the Messiah, that THEREFORE the Jews cannot have rejected what was never offered them.
see:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2007/071107_b_Hagee.htm
What the smeg is going on?
If I was the sort of misguided chap that did not believe in the fundamentals of the Federal Reserve system, I'D say it looks as if the Rapture Freaks are being run by same.
Note a coincidence I've been (drifting in & out of consciousness) pondering.
1) The (Rothschilds' infleuenced) declaration by Arthur Balfour calling for a Jewish state in 1917.
2) & the (earliest) reference to such in the 1917 edition of the Scofield Reference Bible (the fruitcakes Bible of choice).
The following may be of interest/ relevance.
Approx 7 years ago I bought a book (somewhat dated) on USA religious currents (I thought would be of use as a reference book) called:
`A Religious History of the American people'
by Sydney E. Ahlstrom
Yale University Press (1973)
Look just stop that sniggering, I did not then know I was buying the Skull & Bones revised version.
Well anyway, other sources state that the Scofield Reference Bible mentions Jews returning to zion was dated 1917. Same year as Rothschilds' asset Lord Arthur Balfour's declaration calling for a Jewish homeland.
On Page 810 (of said Skull & Bones approved version) it says:
`The true monument to his (Cyrus Ingerson Scofield) lifelong efforts, however, is the Scofield Reference Bible, first published in 1909, but further amplified with the aid of various associates in 1919'.
NO mention of the INITIAL Israel centric 1917 version. which is the defining aspect of today's rapture freakery.
I would probably just be mulling this quietly to myself now, but I am obsessed with the fact that Rapture freak in chief John Hagee says Jesus was NOT the Messiah. & I cannot help but see a pattern; punching me in the face...