8/4/2019 A is Ha

1/7

Today, we face a state of military hegemony: political,economic and intellectual control. There is not a single youngscholar who is not on the military's payroll or network.Shahbaz Sharif used to instruct the police to facilitate Hamid

Gul's Varan bus service

A dissidents job is always fraught with dangers. In case of Pakistan, the risks involved in criticizing all-powerful Khakis and their proxy Taliban hardly need an elucidation. Still, dissident voices keeptormenting military establishment. Ayesha Siddiqa is one such tormenter. In an interview withViewpoint, she candidly exposes the Khaki myths painstakingly built by indoctrinating outlets. Read on:

Tell us about yourself.

I was born and raised in Lahore which probably explains my madness. I grew up in a Lahore which wasreally a cultural and intellectual hub. Being the only child of a writer-mother - Jamila Hashmi - I wasdragged around by her to all sorts of places like the Pak Tea House, Writer's Guild and others. Grew upseeing some of the top intellectual icons of our country. I went to Cathedral High School which was then

the only co-ed educational institution. Later, I did my graduation from Kinnaird College, Lahore andMasters in Political Science from the Punjab University as an external student because I had by then

joined the civil services. In 1992, I went to the UK to do my Ph.D. in War Studies from King's College,London. One of the first books my mother gave me to read was Maxim Gorky's autobiography. Rightacross my school was People's Publishing House that sold translations of some of the most fantasticliterary works from the then Soviet Union. I still return to Gorky when I am lost. I read almost all Russianauthors, English literature and some French authors. I was raised to become a fiction writer but Iprobably didn't have the balls for that. I still desire to be one because great fiction makes great people.

If one goes by WikiLeaks and reports frequently appearing in global media, the ISI is patronizingTaliban. In your book, Military Inc. and numerous other articles you have written, militaryappears as a conglomerate with financial and industrial interests. Don't you think GHQ's Afghanand Kashmir policy is in contradiction with its economic interests?

In fact, these policies constitute the foundations on which the empire stands. It is the narrative throughwhich everything else is sold. Contrary to the propaganda that military is the only surviving institution ofthe state, it is also a victim of the politics of its echelons. There are factions within the military: somesupport the west and other the Islamists. There is not one policy but several policies. But at a glance,the sense of being a nuclear weapon state gives the army a certain confidence to engage inmisadventures. But more than everything else, dependence on non-state actors is built into its owntactical narrative. This means that it will not give up its claim on either Kashmir or Afghanistan. Thesetwo issues are essential in the process of militarizing the society and the societal mindset, which, in turn,is necessary for military's predation. Today, we face a state of military hegemony: political, economicand intellectual control. Today, there is not a single university in Pakistan or a young scholar who is noton the military's payroll or network. They open shops called think-tanks for their young clients. A

journalist, who does not take directions from the military, is a rarity in today's Pakistan. Institutionally,this outreach is done through the ISPR and the ISI. But there are other informal channels as well suchas the army chief himself. Recently, heard a top Pakistani journalist claim in a private meeting that the

military intends to fight the Taliban because he had heard that from the army chief with whom he hadabout six private sessions. The national security narrative built on and around the Kashmir andAfghanistan issues is critical for establishing military's hegemony.

Every time ISI is accused of patronizing Taliban, we are told bout over 2000 soldiers who havesacrificed their lives in 'war on terror'. What explains this contradiction. Who is army patronizing,if it is patronizing, and who it is fighting back?

The army only fights those militants who have gone astray but the policy is to continue supporting non-state actors. Over the past couple of decades or more, the army has developed an operationaldependence on these forces. The animosity with India is ideological and so there will always be theneed to build and sustain elements having blind faith in destroying the enemy and not question thenarrative. The Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and certain factions of the Taliban areconsidered friendly and dependable. However, there is no real plan to ensure that they all stay strictly incontrol. For instance, there are elements from within the friendly forces that go astray and launch an

8/4/2019 A is Ha

2/7

attack. Army's own men dying helps build the narrative that it is under attack and so deserves sympathyand support of the people.

The Viewpoint was told by an ISPR spokesperson: ''As for as the defense budget is concernedit's total Rs. 450 billion which makes almost 17 percent of the total budget whereas propagandais more than 50 percent goes to military'' . Is it really 17 percent or is it some twist here?

Under Musharraf and Shaukat Aziz the government introduced cosmetic changes such as de-linkingmilitary pensions from the main defense budget. There are about Rs. 100-150 billion that are notincluded in the budget. This is one problem. But then there is the overall share claimed by the military innational resources that would put the percentage at a much higher level. There is a need to monetizethe military's commercial ventures and the state assets that they utilize for financial purposes to arrive ata correct figure. The defense budget calculated to the older formula (pensions and all other hiddenitems included) make it over 25% of CGE. The hidden items also include expenditure used on militarybut drawn from civilian head of expenditure. A calculation of defense expenditure based on their overallshare of national resources would take the figure even higher.

A big justification for big defence budget is '' due to India's hegemonic designs''. When Pakistanwent nuclear, we were told by government as well as military hawks that no body could cast anevil eye on Pakistan anymore. Why this big defense budget when we have The Bomb? And

don't you think the increasing budget contradicts the logic behind The Bomb?

Since we follow the US-USSR example, there is no evidence that non-conventional defense reduces theneed or the size for conventional defense. The nuclear deterrence causing budgetary reduction formuladoes not work for us at all because we have not gone into a phase of sustainable confidence-buildingmeasures or given up the military option for resolving disputes with India. The example being Kargilcrisis or the attacks by non-state actors originating from Pakistan. Due to India's superior orquantitatively stronger position to push Pakistan up the conflict escalation spiral, buying major weaponsystems to stave off threat of a war imposed by India in a nuclear environment becomes necessary. Ourdefense budget will never go down unless we change the politics of our rivalry with India.

Army claims to have a superb system of internal accountability. It is said many officers go homeon minor corruption charges. That's why, they say, this organization is still intact and takes overthe country with out bloody revolution. Your comments.

The organization does not survive because of its superior accountability but due to its mafia-styleaccountability. This means that while those at the top and at responsible positions are not touched,others who are not so well-connected are kept in line with this narrative of accountability. Firstly, theaccountability system is flawed. It is one organization whose manpower (Department of the Auditor-General of Pakistan) conducts both internal and external audit. To give one example, I have served bothas a military accountant and a defense auditor. Am I likely to point out issues with spending that I hadapproved during my tenure as part of the Military Accountant-General's organization? Second, thedefense budget has over 20% wastage which is due to procurement of weapons and other items,incorrect human resource planning and a negative teeth-to-tail ratio. This means the military spendsmore on non-essentials than essentials.

In one of your articles you claimed a general in Pakistan is worth 500 millions. Can you compare

it with the costs incurred by an Indian general?

The worth of an Indian general is much less because they do not get to make all the properties thatPakistani generals do. To give one example, when general Musharraf retired he had 8 properties onprime location and his legal net worth runs into millions of rupees. And I have not even begun tocalculate the worth of his off-budget wealth. The interesting part is that military acquires land at cheaprates. There are stories after stories of ordinary people being forced off their land or forced into sellingtheir land at cheap rates which is then developed using state infrastructure and sold at higher rates. It isworth pointing out that there is a thin line between public and private spending on defense. There arehundreds of cases pointed out in defense audit reports whereby military's commercial ventures drawupon state resources.

Also, according to an ISPR spokesperson: ''There are two types of service setups. One iscommand and other is staff. From Major General to Lieutenant General there is total 10 years of

service, 3 to 4 for command and rest is staff. On staff you only get 90000 to 100000 Rs. Salary, 5to 6 people of staff. A staff car and driver and one house. One house servant''. It does not sound500 million. Your comments.

8/4/2019 A is Ha

3/7

It is not just the pay of the generals which is counted as part of their worth. The lands they acquire aspart of their being in service is included. Also, the money spent on acquisition and development of thegolf courses, residential colonies, housing schemes, etc. An exact calculation may push up the figureeven higher.

Military has been accused of land grabbing and making quick bucks out of real estate business.But privately many officers say: well! bureaucrats, judges, journalists, police officers, all getresidential houses and plots who only single out military officers.Your comments.

The military economy, as I tried to point out in my book "Military Inc", is part of the elite economy. ThePakistan military does not predate alone but in partnership with other actors. The fact that judges,

journalists, and bureaucrats are also allowed similar facilities is so that military personnel can say 'butthey do it too'. The other point worth attention is that while others do not engage in such land-grabbingso frequently, the military has an institutionalized system to do so. There is no justification for givingaway land to any select group.

Also, we are told that not every general has made fortunes. Only the ones enjoying power undermilitary dictatorships have benefited. Others have not. What is your opinion?

It is a false assumption that no one has made money. Lt. General (retd) Amjad is considered as one of

the honest generals. However, he also made his 'legal' millions selling the land acquired through thearmy. Having said that I agree there are always those who make less money than others. However,military's predation is an institutional feature. It is no longer about personalities. Every military regimeopens up newer facilities for the officer cadre. The problem is that these perks are legalized and so wegenerally don't look at these as theft of national resources. There is not a single general who has notbenefitted. Be it the Islamist General Hamid Gull or the pro-democracy Lt. General (retd) Talat Masood,they are all beneficiaries. They benefit under military rule and also under civilian rule. Ask somereasonable police officer who would be willing to tell you how Shahbaz Sharif used to instruct the policeto facilitate Hamid Gull's Varan bus service. In fact, the retired military officers are as much a part ofmilitary incorporated as serving.

Adnan Farooq

Adnan Farooq did his Masters in Political Science and hasworked with daily The Nation, Lahore and daily Jang, Lahore. Hehas also volunteered for Milieudefensie, Amsterdam. Friends ofthe earth, Europe, on environmental issues. He has been workingwith ON FILE, an Amsterdam-based publication run by journalistsfrom all around the world. He studied Conflict Resolution atUniversity of Amsterdam and is living in Paris. He is the editor.

Share Link:

Comments

0#5Ahmed Tareen2010-09-08 22:40Quoting salman:

It appears that the writer is herself on payroll of some power, mandated to destroy the image ofdefense forces. Her approach to malign the institute and shake the foundation with baselessaccusations is highly deplorable. It must be appreciated that barring few individuals rest of themilitary men are simple, hardworking, focused and making both ends meet. Articles like these hurttheir feelings. Yes Army has a system of looking after its work forces in an institutionalized, waywhich is far better than others that is why it is subjected to criticism by hawks. They want thisinstitution to be dead like others. Rather it should be taken as role model by others to be followed.

Just to give one example in recent floods there was a place where all co-located setups of Army,Wapda, Railways, Govt School, police station came under 12 feet of water. All of the govt servants

http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-108http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&title=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://technorati.com/faves?add=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://ma.gnolia.com/bookmarklet/add?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&title=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&title=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://www.myspace.com/Modules/PostTo/Pages/?c=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&t=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&title=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://del.icio.us/post?&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&title=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://myweb2.search.yahoo.com/myresults/bookmarklet?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&t=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNews%20http://www.google.com/bookmarks/mark?op=add&bkmk=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.viewpointonline.net%2Fmilitarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html&title=%E2%80%98Military%27s%20predation%20is%20an%20institutional%20feature%E2%80%99%20%7C%20BottomNewshttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#bookmarkhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-108

8/4/2019 A is Ha

4/7

abandoned their setups and fled away less military men who till last kept on salvaging governmentproperty (weapons) from their units and not a single one deserted / abandoned their unit althoughtheir own families back home were also victims of flood. I think if one day Pak faces some nationaldisaster people will be looking towards military men. The writer should stop weakening theinstitution of Army just to earn from Best sellers, however individual cases may be investigatedand published.

i can write pages here, but i know you are never going to think. come out from your 8th grade textbook and Alpha Bravo CharlieQuote

0#4SHammad2010-09-07 22:05DEar Salman, whoever you are, I enjoy such kneejerk vitroilicQuote

-3#3salman2010-09-07 16:07It appears that the writer is herself on payroll of some power, mandated to destroy the image ofdefense forces. Her approach to malign the institute and shake the foundation with baselessaccusations is highly deplorable. It must be appreciated that barring few individuals rest of themilitary men are simple, hardworking, focused and making both ends meet. Articles like these hurttheir feelings. Yes Army has a system of looking after its work forces in an institutionalized, waywhich is far better than others that is why it is subjected to criticism by hawks. They want thisinstitution to be dead like others. Rather it should be taken as role model by others to be followed.Just to give one example in recent floods there was a place where all co-located setups of Army,Wapda, Railways, Govt School, police station came under 12 feet of water. All of the govt servantsabandoned their setups and fled away less military men who till last kept on salvaging governmentproperty (weapons) from their units and not a single one deserted / abandoned their unit althoughtheir own families back home were also victims of flood. I think if one day Pak faces some nationaldisaster people will be looking towards military men. The writer should stop weakening the institutionof Army just to earn from Best sellers, however individual cases may be investigated and published.Quote

+1#2Zafar Ullah2010-09-07 11:24In light of the facts unfolded by you people, it appears that army is exploiting the resources of thecountry. Nothing new, I think, majority of people have already perceived it, but they feel helplesshaving no way out of this imbroglio. Army will not let the reforms take place as it may castrate them.To my mind thing will keep moving from bad to worse till, sorry to say, fragmentation.Quote

0#1Azad2010-09-06 15:29Ms. Siddiqa is right mostly but she never touches the Army's dependence on the Pentagon andoften the pressure from the Pentagon is the deciding factor. I am not trying to come up with anexcuse, obviously the army should be more responsive to the people of the country but with the Pakarmy that is not the case.Realistically there is no force in Pakistan that can make the army see the light because for the armythe institution's interest has priority over the country's interest. The army believes that if it ispowerful, it can protect the country so the army's interest takes a priority.The problem is that the army's approach is actually undermining the nation's interests.I don't see the mindset changing barring some catastrophic event.

To make the situation worst, Pakistan has a civilian government that is devoid of any ideas or anyplans for the country and is more interested in making money and confronting the Supreme courtrather than winning it over.

http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-104http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-102http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-98http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-98http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-95http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-104http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-102http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-98http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.html#comment-95

8/4/2019 A is Ha

5/7

Quote

Amid the Arab Spring, Obama's dilemma over Saudi Arabia

There's a crisis in U.S. policy in the Middle East - and it's not aboutLibya. For weeks the Obama administration has been preoccupied with avertinga humanitarian catastrophe in North Africa. But on the other side of theregion, in the oil-rich Arabian Peninsula, a matter of vital, strategicimportance awaits the urgent attention of policymakers.Over there, the ailing 87-year-old king of Saudi Arabia probably isn'tgetting much sleep. Abdullah, this Sunni monarch of monarchs, custodian ofthe holy mosques of Mecca and Medina, can see the flames of instability andturmoil licking at all his borders. In the south, Yemen is imploding, to theadvantage of his al-Qaeda enemies. In the east, Bahrain's Shiite majorityhas been in such a state of revolt that Abdullah has already sent armed

forces to prevent Iran from establishing a "cat's paw" on the Sunni Arabside of the Persian Gulf. In the north, Abdullah sees Iraq'sShiite-dominated government as nothing more than a front for the hatedPersians. In the west, a Palestinian majority is demanding that theHashemite king of Jordan become a constitutional monarch. Meanwhile, Egypt'sHosni Mubarak, that other Sunni pillar of regional stability, has alreadybeen overthrown.Historically, in times of trouble, Saudi kings have depended on Americanpresidents to guarantee their external security. But at this moment ofcrisis, Abdullah views President Obama as a threat to his internal security.He fears that in the event of a widespread revolt, Obama will demand that heleave office, just as he did to Mubarak, that other longtime friend of the

United States. Consequently, Abdullah is reportedly making arrangements forPakistani troops to enter his kingdom should the need to suppress populardemonstrations arise.This presents the Obama administration with a particularly thorny dilemma.Saudi Arabia is the world's largest oil producer and the only one withsufficient excess production capacity to moderate rises in the price of oil.Instability in Saudi Arabia could produce panic in the oil markets and anoil shock that could put an end to America's economic recovery (and thepresident's hopes for reelection). This would argue for granting an"exception" to Saudi Arabia from the Obama administration's trumpeting ofuniversal rights. Indeed, the soft criticism of Bahrain's Saudi-dictatedsuppression of its people suggests that this has already become U.S. policy.

Yet helping the Saudi king effectively erect a wall against the politicaltsunami sweeping across the Arab world is not a long-term solution. Ifthere's one thing that we can now predict with some confidence, it's that noArab authoritarian regime can remain immune from the demands of its peoplefor political freedom and accountable government. To be sure, $100 billionin subventions from the palace and the promise of 60,000 jobs can helppostpone, for a time, the demands of unemployed Saudi youths. But politicalfreedom, transmitted across borders via cable TV and the Internet, hasproved to be a seductive idea. In the end, it will not be assuaged byeconomic bribes or police-state suppression.And the Saudi system is fragile. Power is concentrated in the hands of theking and his brothers, who are old and ailing. The Saud family's legitimacydepends in significant part on its pact with a fundamentalist Wahhabi clergy

http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://groups.google.com/group/karachi-786/t/4b7fa93ce21f1a9http://www.viewpointonline.net/militarys-predation-is-an-institutional-feature.htmlhttp://groups.google.com/group/karachi-786/t/4b7fa93ce21f1a9

8/4/2019 A is Ha

6/7

that is deeply opposed to basic political reforms, such as equal rights forwomen. The deep structural tensions generated by a 21st-century Westernizedelite existing within a 15th-century Saudi social structure have beenpapered over for decades by oil wealth. If this strange social contractbegins to fray, it might tear completely. And over in the eastern quarter,adjacent to Bahrain, where most of Saudi Arabia's oil reserves are located,

sits a restive Shiite minority who have been treated as second-classcitizens for decades.Even if the Obama administration were understandably inclined to leave wellenough alone, it cannot afford to do so for other reasons. The Saudis areattempting to erect the wall beyond their borders not only by suppressingthe revolt in Bahrain but also by insisting that Jordan's king not pursuethe reform agenda he has promised his people. In effect, Abdullah intends tocarve out an exception for all the kings and sheiks - Sunni to a man - inSaudi Arabia's neighborhood. It might work for a time. But should this dambreak, it could generate a sectarian Sunni-Shiite, Arab-Iranian conflict onone side and an Arab-Israeli conflict on the other. It could spell the endof Pax Americana in the Middle East.

For all of these reasons, President Obama urgently needs to negotiate a newcompact with King Abdullah. He has to find a way to convince him thatdefining a road map that leads to constitutional monarchies in hisneighborhood, and eventually in Saudi Arabia, is the only effective way tosecure his kingdom and the interests of his subjects. Abdullah has beenwilling to undertake important reforms in the past. But if the king is to bepersuaded to embark on this road again, he will need to know that thepresident will provide a secure safety net of support, rather than underminehim. And he will need to know that the United States will not make a dealwith his Iranian enemies at Saudi expense.Such a compact would be difficult to negotiate in the best of times. It

cannot even be broached in current circumstances unless the basic trustbetween the president and the king can be reestablished. With a budgetcrisis at home and turmoil in the Middle East, it's understandable thatObama has had little time for the personal engagement with potentates thatdoes not come naturally to him. But it's not just Abdullah's survival thatis at stake. A revolt in Saudi Arabia could sink his presidency.*Article Source:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-the-arab-spring-obamas-dilemma-over-saudi-arabia/2011/04/07/AFhILDxC_story.html*

The Secret Agenda to Destroy the African Union*By Prof. Sam Hamod*None of the talking heads on TV or any columnists have dealt with one of themajor reasons the US and EU want to get rid of Libya's Muammar Qaddafi. It'snot about "human rights." That is a cover - they want to stop Qaddafi'smoney that is going to form and support the African Union.

This is not a pro- or anti-Qaddafi article; it is an attempt to make clearan aspect of this situation that none of our major media have discussed, but

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-the-arab-spring-obamas-dilemma-over-saudi-arabia/2011/04/07/AFhILDxC_story.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-the-arab-spring-obamas-dilemma-over-saudi-arabia/2011/04/07/AFhILDxC_story.htmlhttp://groups.google.com/group/karachi-786/t/903354d7620fa155http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-the-arab-spring-obamas-dilemma-over-saudi-arabia/2011/04/07/AFhILDxC_story.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/amid-the-arab-spring-obamas-dilemma-over-saudi-arabia/2011/04/07/AFhILDxC_story.htmlhttp://groups.google.com/group/karachi-786/t/903354d7620fa155

8/4/2019 A is Ha

7/7

may be at the heart of our hurried rhetoric that Qaddafi should step downbecause - as the senile Senator McCain keeps saying, "Qaddafi is crazy" -and other outlandish things. WE are given all the negative things againstQaddafi, so that he seems bizarre, crazy, a lunatic, etc. These are the sametype of lies Ronald Reagan made up about Qaddafi "hit squads" - lies laterquashed by none other than Secretary of State George Schultz, when he told a

joint committee of Congress in Oct. 1986 that the story about the Qaddafi"hit squads" was pure disinformation!Without Qaddafi's money, there will be no money for African Unionpeace-keeping forces, no major unity in Africa and no power to stop thecontinued colonialism of America and the EU from advancing further intoAfrica.Most American and European citizens don't know of the African Command thatAmerica has set up in Djibouti to interfere in the domestic affairs ofAfrican nations. This "Command" is nothing but another colonial tool; it hadits hand in making a mess of Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria and now Libya. Nomatter how much America denies this, those of us who know how our American

"black ops" work and who have long followed our colonial intentions, areaware of this new move against the African continent.There were a few stories about this African Command in some of ournewspapers, but then nothing; and Africans leaders are upset about it. Theyare also upset about our new naval base in Djibouti. But none of our majormedia ever talks about it anymore, and none talk about the Qaddafi moneythat bankrolls the African Union.With this in mind, don't follow all the propaganda and lies being told to usevery day on every American "news" outlet. This brings to mind Newspeak -propaganda, or the language "designed to diminish the range of thought," inGeorge Orwell's novel, 1984 - and was evident on TV, radio and newspapers

(especially the New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and LATimes since it was taken over months ago by a friend of the New York TimesSulzberger family). This is about not only the EU's desire to control Libyan"sweet crude," but also about the West's attempt at stopping the fulldevelopment of the African Union.One last note, there have been photos of Africans being lynched in Libya. Wedon't know who they are, but we do know there are African Union memberssending troops to help Qaddafi against the American backed "rebels." Butremember this, Libyans are black, blue black, dark brown, brown, dark tan,tan and white - the Africans who are helping Qaddafi are black and the onesfighting Qaddafi are mostly white - so if there is any lynching going on, itis more likely the white Libyan "rebels" doing the alleged lynching.

But if anyone needs to know the truth about American and EU lies, one hasbut to look at Pravda and Xinhua news that make clear that, according totheir satellites, Qaddafi's air force did not attack the Libyan people. Tobetter understand this, please, please, rent the movie, WAG THE DOG to seehow Hollywood makes movies to help America lie to the world in order tocontinue their empire and colonial building.*Article Source: http://wadhaf.com/archives/1717*

http://wadhaf.com/archives/1717*http://wadhaf.com/archives/1717*