UstaadKhan Blogs

POLICE IN northwestern Pakistan have arrested an armed American man close to the Afghan border where he said he was on a mission to hunt down Osama bin Laden.

They detained Gary Faulkner, a 52-year-old construction worker, after a 10-hour search in the country’s lawless tribal areas.

Officers said he told them he planned to “decapitate” the al-Qaeda leader. He was carrying a 40-inch sword, a handgun and dagger, and was equipped with night-vision goggles.

A local police officer, Mumtaz Ahmad Khan, said: “We initially laughed when he told us that he wanted to kill Osama bin Laden.” Bin Laden has evaded capture ever since the 9/11 attacks that shocked the world and turned al-Qaeda into a global terror brand. Analysts believe the 53-year-old Saudi has slipped back and forth across the porous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, relying on networks of tribal supporters in a region where central government holds little sway.

Last month, US secretary of state Hillary Clinton said bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan’s lawless border regions – and that he was being protected by Pakistani government officials.

However, some analysts also believe he may be dead, pointing out that video messages featuring the jihadi leader have all but dried up in recent years. Rumours have long circulated that he is struggling with kidney disease, or was badly wounded in an airstrike.

The tantalising prospect of tracking down such a notorious criminal has attracted a small band of bounty hunters and fantasists, lured by a $25 million (€20 million) FBI reward offered for information leading to his capture.

Mr Faulkner’s solo mission is the latest bizarre twist in the world’s highest-stakes game of hide-and-seek. He told police he visited Pakistan seven times.

On this occasion he arrived in the country at the start of the month and travelled to the district of Chitral, a mountainous area close to the Afghan border that attracts adventurous tourists for its hiking.

He was assigned a police guard – common in an area where foreigners are targeted by kidnap gangs. When he checked out without informing his minder, police launched a manhunt, according to Mr Khan, who was involved in the investigation.

“A search operation was launched and we found him 14 kilometres [nine miles] short of the Pakistan-Afghan border. He was trying to enter Nuristan,” said Mr Khan.

Nuristan is a stronghold of the Afghan Taliban, and along with Chitral is often mooted as a possible bin Laden safe haven. As well as his weapons, Mr Faulkner was also carrying a book of Christian verse.

“He said 9/11 caused colossal losses to the US, therefore he wanted to locate Osama bin Laden and his friends,” added Mr Khan.

He apparently told police: “God is with me, and I am confident I will be successful in killing him.” Mr Faulkner is being questioned by Pakistani intelligence agents.

FBI special agent Richard J. Kolko confirmed the arrests of the New Jersey suspects.

The arrests of two more Americans as would-be jihadists recently, as they were trying to board flights from New York City to Somalia, is a warning that the face of terror may be changing. Threats not only come from abroad; they can be homegrown.

Domestic terrorism is not new … as this area, home to the late Timothy McVeigh, is all too aware. And the two New Jersey men unmasked by an undercover New York City police officer and arrested as they headed toward hoped-for terror training were just the latest episode in domestic arrests that started with the Lackawanna Six shortly after 9/11.

So far, there have been 49 cases of radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism within the United States, and 133 arrests. And so far, the would-be terrorists have proven, thankfully, inept.

But it only takes one. And America must not let down its guard.

“There is no long mile between the terrorist wannabe and the lethal zealot,” Rand Corp. analyst Brian Jenkins testified May 26 before the House Homeland Security Committee.

America’s Muslim-American community plays a huge role in maintaining our guard. It has indeed been helpful … the local chapter of the Muslim American Public Affairs Committee has been recognized for its work with the FBI … but there must be no let-up in community condemnation of terrorism and the organizations that support it. (more…)

By disarming the Muslim countries one by one, the neo-conservative US policy serves the Israeli objective of ‘securing’ its expanding borders, which at present is confined to building settlements (land theft) in the occupied territories. When this episode is forgotten, Israel will try to occupy another piece of land using the pretext of security, no doubt the world will be told, Israel was compelled to act in self-defence; thus, creeping towards its ultimate dream of creating Ertez (greater) Israel that runs from the Nile, to the Euphrates. The latest attempts to intimidate nuclear-free Iran by nuclear Israel, reflects that long term Israeli ambition.

Here are the facts:

*       Iran has not attacked any of its neighbours over the last 60 years, unlike belligerent Israel. 

*       Iran is a signatory to Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) treaty, and has no nuclear weapons. (more…)

WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad — including two Reuters news staff. Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded. For further information please visit the special project website www.collateralmurder.com.

We are incorrigible optimists. Because India’s name was not mentioned in Brussels meeting and the London conference on future of Afghanistan, we believed that the US and the West had come on the right track. But it appears that they are still off track, as they continue to create doubts about security of Pakistan’s nukes.

Director of the US Defence Intelligence Agency Lt General Ronald Burgess told the US senate Intelligence Committee that the Pakistani government and the military establishment both came under repeated pressure from the Taliban extremists last year, including an attack on the army headquarters, which raised questions over the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arms. “We have confidence in Pakistan’s ability to safeguard its nuclear weapons though vulnerabilities exist,” he said. This statement can be described as a double speak; it is in fact self-contradictory Pakistan’s nukes can’t be safe and vulnerable at the same time. General Burgess went on to say that the tribal areas in Pakistan continued to provide ‘valuable sanctuary’ to Al Qaeda and others and while attacks on these groups had disrupted some of their activities, however they remained resilient.

One could put them a question: could more than 100000 American and NATO troops and Afghan forces in similar number break the will of Afghans? Certainly not; and they have much more resilience than Pakistan’s Talibant. Director of US National Intelligence Dennis Blair told the same committee: “India-Pakistan conflict was helping the militants because Islamabad still believed that some militant groups were strategically useful to counter India”. But this is not true because Pakistan has banned all organizations and they act against extremists and terrorists of any hue and shade, whether pro or anti Pakistan. He persisted in discerning in pro Pakistani Taliban and those dangerous for Pakistan. He acknowledged: “Islamabad had demonstrated determination and persistence in combating militants it perceived dangerous to Pakistan’s interests, particularly those involved in attacks in the settled areas, including FATA-based Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan”. It is indeed Pakistan’s war; however, they are to blame in equal measure for creating monster of militancy during Afghan war. By destroying Tehrik-i-Taliban’s infrastructure in Swat, Malakand Division and South Waziristan, the toing and froing of the militants across Pak-Afghan border has considerably reduced. (more…)

By Farhat Taj:

In terms of the drone attacks, the US must not make any distinction between al Qaeda and the Taliban. They both have internalised a global ideology that is anti-civilisation and anti-human

There is news coming up in the media that al Qaeda in Waziristan may run away to Yemen in the face of growing drone attacks. The people of Waziristan have expressed deep concern at this news. They do not want al Qaeda to run away from Waziristan. They want al Qaeda along with the Taliban burnt to ashes on the soil of Waziristan through relentless drone attacks. The drone attacks, they believe, are the one and only ‘cure’ for these anti-civilisation creatures and the US must robustly administer them the ‘cure’ until their existence is annihilated from the world. The people of Waziristan, including tribal leaders, women and religious people, asked me to convey in categorical terms to the US the following in my column.

One, your new drone attack strategy is brilliant, i.e. one attack closely followed by another. After the first attack the terrorists cordon off the area and none but the terrorists are allowed on the spot. Another attack at that point kills so many of them. Excellent! Keep it up!

Your drone technology has the full capacity to encircle and eliminate al Qaeda and the Taliban in Waziristan. If you fail to do so and al Qaeda manages to run away to Yemen or any other place, it could only happen in two cases: either you are highly incompetent people or you have ulterior motives.

The people who have established one of the world’s most vibrant democracies and have taken science and technology to a new zenith cannot be highly incompetent. Now the only possibility is that you have ulterior motives, which could facilitate al Qaeda’s escape from Waziristan. (more…)

There is little need any more to offer consistent opposition to Barack Obama, since he himself is already running hard against the many previous incarnations of Barack Obama.

The first one we met was Barack the radical progressive, in his primary campaign against Hillary. Then in the general election we were introduced to the centrist Obama, who promised to invade Pakistan if need be, called for an end to partisanship, and lectured about fiscal sobriety.

Then with congressional majorities, soaring public support, and obsequious media attention came the leftist ideologue President Obama, who tried to ram through a statist health-care regime, gobbled up private enterprises, and gave us Anita Dunn and Van Jones.

Now we are back to sorta centrist Obama, who is going to fight terror, not apologize any more to the Muslim world, and freeze spending rather than give us another $2 trillion in debt.

These serial reset Obamas are quite astonishing even for a politician.

Take the examples of public advocate Obama’s once idealistic promotion of C-SPAN broadcasts of the health-care debate, and Obama’s current fiery lamentations over the Supreme Court decision overturning elements of the McCain-Feingold limitations on corporate campaign donations.

But Obama, the current reformer, seems to be railing at Obama, the cynical backroom organizer, who would never dare televise anything about his thousand-page health-care mess. Yet Obama II not only nixed Obama I’s repeated promises of C-SPAN debates, but outsourced his health-care bill to congressional insiders, who did more backroom-dealing, vote-buying, and quid-pro-quoing than at any other time in recent memory.

So there is no consistency even in the flip-flopping. Obama III as the sudden guardian of campaign-financing curbs is antithetical to Obama I, the rejectionist of any government interference. In 2008 Obama I destroyed the idea of public campaign financing of presidential elections. Indeed, in his efforts to raise a billion dollars of private money, Obama became the first presidential candidate in the general election in over 30 years to back out of public financing, an idea which is now more or less kaput. (more…)

The United States will supply drone aircraft to Pakistan which will significantly enhance the country’s surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, visiting U. S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday.

Talking to reporters in Islamabad, Gates said that 12 RQ-7 Shadow unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) will be part of one billion dollar allocation for Pakistan from its Coalition Support Fund.

He said weapons and equipment will also be provided to Pakistan for the war against terrorism.

The Shadow UAVs will help build the Pakistan Army’s capacity for intelligence-gathering, said the U.S. defense secretary.

Gates did not reply to a question whether the U.S. would impose any condition as that the Shadow drones could not be used along Pakistan’s eastern border with India. (more…)

US delegation led by the Special Envoy for Pakistan and Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, met President Zardari in Lahore. The president took up serious issues with Holbrooke keeping in view present and past circumstances in the region. Of great significance was President Zardari’s mention of fighting a ‘rival ideology’ in the past along with the US and the West. The reference was obviously to the Afghan communist regime and the ensuing battle between the mujahideen and the communists after the Soviet forces entered Afghanistan in support of their co-ideologists. President Zardari told Holbrooke that it was because of the Afghan jihad that militancy rose in Pakistan. Though this is certainly not something new for the Americans, the president’s reminder about the West’s role in general and the US’s role in particular in leading to the rise of religious extremism in this region is noteworthy. The covert support of the US for the jihadis in the Afghan war is no secret. It was a policy of the Cold War era, the West being an anti-communist bloc. Neither the US nor Pakistan thought much about supporting religious fanatics at that point in time, focused as they were on the struggle against communism. The unforeseen and unintended consequences of that strategy have landed the whole region in a mess today.

After the Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan, the US and the West did not look back at the war-torn country after 1989. The Afghans felt betrayed after all their sacrifices. Pakistan was left to pick up the pieces. Instead of starting a rehabilitation and reconstruction process in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other regional players started to pursue their own vested interests there. The mujahideen fell into a debilitating civil war in an already battered country and later on the Taliban were unleashed. At the end of it all, Pakistan was responsible for installing the most barbaric of regimes in Afghanistan, that of the Taliban. The US is as much responsible for this crisis, or maybe even more so, than any other regional player. If it had not left the Afghans high and dry after the war, things could have been significantly different. Pakistan was also greatly affected by the American indifference and consolidated the trend towards becoming a national security-driven state almost to the exclusion of everything else. Rising inflation, poverty, unemployment, the energy crisis, etc., are the costs of past historical follies. President Zardari’s reminder to Holbrooke was in this context. (more…)