[DAWN] By all accounts, Ashraf Ghani ...former chancellor of Kabul University. Before returning to Afghanistan in 2002 he was a scholar of political science and anthropology. He worked at the World Bank working on international development assistance. As Finance Minister of Afghanistan between July 2002 and December 2004, he led Afghanistan's attempted economic recovery until the Karzais stole all the money. .. is an intellectually arrogant and prickly personality, yet amenable to flattery. He seems to have a 'chip on the shoulder' regarding Pakistain. Having been parachuted into Afghan politics from the Washington-based World Bank, Ghani does not have a 'natural' constituency within Afghanistan, even among his fellow Pakhtuns. He is dependent on the support of disparate Afghan warlords, like Rashid Dostum ...ethnic Uzbek warlord who distinguished himself fighting the Soviets and the Taliban. The story that he had a bad guy run over with a tank is an exaggeration. It was an armored personnel carrier... . President Ghani may thus have limited authority to negotiate with the several power centres in Afghanistan including the Taliban.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] THE tragic deaths in the aftermath of the PTI's large rally in Multan over the weekend are yet another emotional moment in the passionate and stamina-testing anti-government movement that Imran Khan ... aka Taliban Khan, who ain't the sharpest bulb on the national tree... launched two months ago. By now, the PTI has tried everything in its bid to oust the government. The sit-in on Constitution Avenue is already epic, there have been massive rallies in several cities, there has been violence and attacks on state buildings, civil disobedience has been threatened, and the PTI has surely solidified its base and even grown it some -- but the government does not appear to be falling and in fact seems to be recovering from the body blows it has suffered. So, the question for the PTI: where does it go from here? The party is clearly in high campaign gear and full election mode, but how long is it sustainable? Discounting Mr Khan's ability to carry forward momentum is risky business, but what is the PTI's strategy here? Is there any long-term plan?
Perhaps Mr Khan views his party's ascent to power as a two-step process. As long as Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf... is prime minister and the PML-N are in power, the PTI cannot be in power and Mr Khan cannot be prime minister. So ouster of the PML-N must precede any realisation of the PTI's ambitions and therefore the PTI is not concerning itself with long-term strategising. Yet, a permanent protest movement is one thing, while a movement specifically designed to oust a government will need to contend with the reality that the government does not appear to be falling. Passion and commitment aside, exactly what the PTI's strategic thinking is appears to be as much a puzzle today as it was two months ago. At least in terms of an approach, the government's strategy is easier to discern. It appears the PML-N has decided to revive itself and return to the business of governing while ignoring the PTI and PAT protests. Given that the PTI in particular is refusing to budge from its demand for the resignation of Prime Minister Sharif, this may make sense -- but only up to a point. Ultimately, the PML-N will need to address the legitimate demands of the protesters and, at a minimum, enact meaningful reforms to ensure more transparent elections. A permanent stand-off is in the interest of neither the government nor the country.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[Daily Caller] Fox News senior legal analyst Andrew Napolitano appeared on “Special Report with Bret Baier” to discuss the recent White House prosecution scandal, during which he gave his opinion that someone in the Obama administration could be prosecuted for covering up the fact that a White House staffer was implicated in the investigation.
“I see a serious legal issue here,” Napolitano said, “Here’s the legal issue: the government is permitted legally to lie to us. Jay Carney, Josh Earnest, whoever’s speaking for the President, may lawfully lie. We of course can be prosecuted if we lie to the government. But the government can’t lawfully lie to itself.”
“So someone from the administration lied in an official inquiry to an investigator from the Congress, and we know there was an official inquiry. That is a felony. So the cover-up to the Congress, Rep. Chaffetz is right to be upset. They were lied to, and someone can be prosecuted for that.”
Napolitano repeated his claim of criminal wrongdoing when Baier brought up the resignation of Inspector General in response to a Senate investigation into the prostitution scandal: “Well, one wonders why he left his job. Was he ordered to be silent? Did he know he was being frustrated? Was he aware of the lying? Did he participate in the lying?”
#4
Judge, just one felony? You are being far too kind to this administration. There is a need for a full-fledged RICO investigation of this criminal enterprise.
[Daily Caller] Republican Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts said Friday that he thinks the IRS targeting scandal was driven by Valerie Jarrett’s office in the White House, according to information that he saw that Democrats tried to “whitewash.”
Roberts told talk radio host Hugh Hewitt that he participated in a Senate Finance Committee investigation into the IRS scandal but “the effort was made by the majority, by the Democrats in the Congress, to simply end that investigation,” which he called a “whitewash.”
[Iran Press TV] An American antiwar activist has explained an anti-US trend among Harvard students, saying they managed to "cut through the layers of propaganda."
a leader of the United National Antiwar Coalition,
WHO?
told Press TV on Saturday that he was "glad", and agreed with some US students who believe that the imperialist country is a greater danger than the ISIL terrorists, according to a recent survey at the university.
"I think it's just a matter of math that the United States empire is the greatest danger to world peace," Iosbaker said.
The activist referred to Washington's killing of "a million Arabs and Moslems in the past decade," as well as the provision of "arms and political backing for the Israeli occupation of Paleostine and the repeated massacres in Gazoo," as proof.
"Which government created the conditions for the emergence of the ISIS?" he asked, adding, the US refuses to stop the "puppet governments" of the region from supporting the turbans in Syria.
Washington should stop supporting the "mercenary" turbans fighting against the Syrian government, whose forces are "the one army that has proven their ability to fight and defeat" ISIL, Iosbaker said, noting, "There will be no ISIS to worry about," then.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/12/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Bushitler turned loose the Sabretooth tiger and pissed out our last fire.
#2
"I think it's just a matter of math that the United States empire is the greatest danger to world peace," he whispered in the ear of the POTUS.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/12/2014 7:26 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I always figured if one could go back in time to change things - a major accident that took out Harvard in the 1800s, for good, would be a positive event.
Even at the dawn of the 20th Century Harvard was supporting the Emperor in China over the National Revolt. Whereas, (credit where due) Yale was supporting the people of China.
#5
Joe Iosbaker, a leader of the United National Antiwar Coalition, told Press TV on Saturday that he was “glad”, and agreed with some US students who believe that the imperialist country is a greater danger than the ISIL terrorists, according to a recent survey at the university.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Perhaps Mr Khan views his party's ascent to power as a two-step process. As long as 
