Former CIA agent’s trial postponed

OurColoradoNews
Ryan Boldrey

The bagel shop parking lot assault case of former CIA agent Raymond Davis was set to begin this past week, but is facing another postponement.

According to Larry Klayman, attorney for Jeff Maes – who was allegedly seriously injured by Davis in an argument over a parking space in Highlands Ranch – the criminal trial is now scheduled for Feb. 12, one day after the civil trial gets under way.

“It’s a very unusual circumstance,” Klayman said of the two trials being stacked on top of one another, adding that the criminal trial was delayed so that the prosecution could “rediscover what they already knew – that Maes’ injuries were caused by Davis and not pre-existing by nature.”

According to Deputy District Attorney Doug Bechtel, the prosecution is still in the process of gathering all of Maes’ medical history in order to prove that the injuries allegedly sustained outside of Einstein Brothers Bagels in October 2011 were indeed not pre-existing.

“I don’t have all the information I need and obviously I need to disclose (everything) to the defense,” Bechtel said in a recorded conversation with Klayman that Klayman released to the Herald. “In a preliminary hearing doubt, quite frankly, doesn’t matter. Is there a reasonable belief that the defendant could have committed this crime is enough. Once we start trial and are talking about ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ now I have to be able to rebut every one of their defenses.”
On that same recording, Bechtel said there are no plea deals being discussed between Davis’ defense and the prosecution at this time.

It was previously reported in an Aug. 30 story in the Herald that Klayman is under the impression that the DA has been talking with the CIA and that the CIA has been putting pressure on the DA to work a plea deal with the defense, so that Davis’ former role with the agency is not exposed in what expects to be a high-profile case.

The DA’s office has adamantly denied having had any contact with the CIA. Davis, 37, is charged with second-degree felony assault for punching the 50-year-old Highlands Ranch man, knocking him to the ground and allegedly seriously injuring his back, neck and arm.

Davis made national headlines in January 2011 when he was jailed in Pakistan for killing two Pakistani men he said were trying to rob him. An unknown source later paid $2.34 million in blood money to have him released. Seven months after his return to the U.S., Davis got into the altercation in the Highlands Ranch parking lot.

“They (CIA) want to shut down the case because they don’t want any information about Raymond Davis to get out, and I think they are also worried that if they don’t run interference for him that he may squeal in terms of what he was doing over there in Pakistan and perhaps on other matters too,” Klayman said.

If the charges remain as they are and Davis is convicted, the defendant faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of 16 years. Davis entered a not-guilty plea April 30.

Lawyer Claims CIA Meddling In Raymond Davis' Colorado Assault Case

CIA agent Raymond Davis, who gained notoriety after his arrest in Pakistan killing two ISI agents, is on trial for assault after a Colorado bar fight. His lawyer charges that the CIA is interfering in the case.

Lahore police hunt Raymond Davis 'blood money' suspect

Editor's Note:  John Kerry traveled to Pakistan to negotiate Davis' release.  Kerry assured Pakistani authorities that Davis would see justice in the United States for his conduct in Pakistan.  Kerry lied.

BBC

Both victims were shot dead at close range.

Pakistani police have launched a murder hunt after the widow and mother-in-law of a man shot dead by CIA contractor Raymond Davis last year were killed.

Police suspect Zohra Haider's father of killing her and her mother.

It is thought he was upset at her plans to re-marry, fearing either dishonour or that he might lose out financially.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars were paid in "blood money" to the family to secure Mr Davis's release. His arrest seriously strained US-Pakistani ties.

Meanwhile, Mr Davis appeared in a US court on Monday and denied charges of assaulting a man in a row over a parking space. The assault allegedly happened in October outside a bagel shop in the city of Denver.

In March 2011 a court in Lahore freed Mr Davis after acquitting him of two counts of murder. He admitted shooting dead Faizan Haider and another man in January last year, but said he was acting in self-defence when they tried to rob him.

The acquittal came when relatives of the dead men pardoned him in court in return for receiving compensation estimated to be about 200 million rupees ($2.34m, £1.1m), known as "blood money".
Under Pakistani Sharia law, relatives of a murder victim can pardon the killer.

'Family argument'
 
Police say Zohra Haider's father, Shahzad Butt, killed her and his wife, Nabeela Bibi, either because he feared losing some of the "blood money" as a result of the re-marriage plans or because he disapproved of her new fiance who he felt might bring dishonour to the family's name.

Mr Davis faces a full trial for assault
in the US in September

Nabeela Bibi was shot in the family's new house, police say, while Zohra Haider was chased down the street by her father before being killed.

The killings apparently followed an argument about the re-marriage plans. The family bought the new house - in a middle class neighbourhood of Lahore - with "blood money" they received.

Police say Shahzad Butt escaped from the scene and is now an absconder from justice with criminal charges pending against him.

The US and Pakistan deliberated for nearly seven weeks as to whether Mr Davis had diplomatic immunity before the "blood money" was paid - leading to his release.

Although Washington has consistently denied paying it, many believe it was handed over through Pakistani intermediaries.

The incident seriously damaged already strained relations between the US and Pakistan - a relationship that further deteriorated months later when American special forces killed Osama Bin Laden in a covert raid in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad.

On Monday Mr Davis, 37, pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree felony assault, misdemeanour, disorderly conduct and fighting in public.

His trial date was set for September 2012 and he remains free on bail. He faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison if convicted.

The US Sent $2.6 Billion In Aid To Pakistan, But It Has Very Little To Show For It

Christian Science Monitor
Taha Siddiqui

Anti-US sentiments and foreign policy squabbles are thwarting good US public relations from reaching turbulent, poor border regions of Pakistan.

Khalil Afridi recently survived a fatal attack by militants when a hand grenade was hurled at him.

 “They want me to quit development work, because of my association with Western donors,” he says.  

He has been a social worker in Khyber Agency, an area bordering Afghanistan through which supply routes run, for the past eight years and is currently working on water projects with the US Agency for International Development (USAID). But he says it’s too dangerous to tell this to locals. Instead, he says, “We tell people it’s the Pakistani government funding these projects.”

Anti-US sentiments and foreign policy squabbles are thwarting good US public relations from reaching turbulent, poor border regions of Pakistan. They are also putting the lives of aid workers there at risk.

Like Mr. Afridi and many others, Shahzad Afridi (not related) has also worked for projects funded by USAID in Khyber Agency and is careful about making sure he does not mention USAID. “The militants think we are spies for the West, and they have threatened me to stop,” he explains.

US Aid in Pakistan: Where's the money going?

USAID does not have any offices in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) but operates out of Peshawar, a settled area adjacent to the tribal areas. Officials here recognize the threats and say security is one of the biggest challenges to their aid work, so they've found a small way to work around it.

“It is the requirement of US government to brand its aid, but we are giving waivers to projects undertaken in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, because if they put up our logos etc, it can be life threatening,” says Mehdi Ali Khan, the communication specialist for USAID here.

Another official says USAID in Pakistan would prefer to be more transparent. Not only would it help to show that money is being put to good use, but it could build good will toward the US.

“We [would] like to get credit but it’s a complex situation. There is a war in Afghanistan. There are areas under conflict in Pakistan.... This is the reality,” he says wishing not to be named since he is not authorized to speak to the media. The official said USAID was putting up signboards that say the project is USAID funded in areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) in northwest Pakistan, but in areas like FATA, it just wasn’t possible.

Story of Adnan Randhawa, foriegn service official, who resigned over Raymond Davis issue

Siasat

ISLAMABAD: Besides the famous ex-foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, who resigned over the Raymond Davis affair, there was a silent officer in the Foreign Service as well, with a conscience, who also quit in protest but was never heard of.

In eight years, he joined three services, all through competitive exams but his conscience pulled him out of them each time, the latest being the Foreign Service from which he resigned in protest against the release of Raymond Davis, a CIA contractor charged with killing of three Pakistanis.

Adnan Randhawa is a restless soul, not ready to reconcile with the decline of the civil service where hypocrisy reigns supreme, corruption as well as deception is rampant, and dissenting views are killed with a stroke of pen. Now this disillusioned youth has quietly started law practice in the district court of Islamabad, saying good-bye to government service.

Neither could he make headlines like Shah Mehmood Qureshi who apparently had resigned 'only' over Raymond Davis case nor was this his first resignation in life, and has joined the list of the country's unsung heroes.

An interview with him gives a rare insight into the working of Foreign Office, the country's 'cozy' relations with China, and Pakistan's sheepish attitude towards the US. All he says is dictated by his personal experiences and observation.

"I understand the Foreign Ministry has scored the highest marks in moral bankruptcy. It is polluted with the officers who would not think for a while compromising on national issues and only for petty gains," he said in a two-page resignation letter after Raymond's release.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn: diplomatic immunity's greatest hits

Guardian


Former IMF head joins an illustrious collection of miscreants who claimed the status to get out of trouble

In invoking diplomatic immunity, Dominique Strauss-Kahn joins
a rogues' gallery of accused international reprobates.

From petty thieves and fine-dodgers to drunk-drivers and outright murderers, "diplomatic immunity" has been the cry of a rogues' gallery of accused international miscreants plunged into hot water overseas.

Former IMF boss Dominique Strauss-Kahn is the latest to try to claim its protection in his bid to get a civil case brought by the New York hotel maid he is alleged to have assaulted struck out.

A look at the history of those claiming the status puts the one-time French presidential hope in a league with some rum fellows, red-faced diplomats and a Burmese ambassador who took immunity to a shocking extreme, or so the story goes.

Mexico: BlackBerry thief

In one of the more bizarre incidents of diplomatic immunity being claimed, a Mexican press attaché sought to evade the law after being caught with the BlackBerrys of several White House staffers.

The theft took place in 2008 during a bilateral get-together in New Orleans. After the devices had been placed on a table outside the meeting room, Rafael Quintero Curiel picked up a handful and headed to the exit.

He made it to the airport before authorities picked him up. After initially denying the theft, he owned up after being shown video footage of him being caught red-handed. Claiming immunity, he headed back to Mexico where he was promptly sacked.

Police officers try to revive PC Yvonne Fletcher after she was shot outside
the Libyan embassy in London in 1984 during an anti-Gaddafi protest.
Libyan officials say the suspect might not be extradited.

The murder of police officer Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in London in 1984 resulted in the UK cutting all diplomatic ties with Tripoli.

No one was prosecuted over her death, and embassy staff claimed diplomatic immunity before being deported.

Tariq Ali: Obama’s Expansion of Af-Pak War "Has Blown Up in His Face"

Great read.

Axis of Logic

Amid ongoing U.S.-Pakistani tensions and fears of a military coup in Pakistan, we are joined by British-Pakistani political commentator, historian, activist, filmmaker and novelist, Tariq Ali. Ali discusses Pakistan’s internal turmoil, as well as Pakistani attitudes toward U.S. foreign policy, the GOP presidential contest, and the prospect of a military strike against Iran. "[Pakistanis] are basically suffering because Obama, arrogantly, escalated the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan and thought he could get away with it. That has now blown up in his face," Ali says.

JUAN GONZALEZ: We turn now to Pakistan, where some say a military coup is imminent. The country’s government is facing uncertainty over its future, four years after a return to democratic rule. During that time, there has also been a near collapse in relations between Pakistan and the United States. The last year witnessed an increase in drone attacks, the killing of two Pakistanis by CIA contractor Raymond Davis, and the U.S. raid that led to the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden. Now Pakistan has forced the U.S. to close a key drone base and threatened to shoot down any U.S. drones. This follows an attack on a senior al-Qaeda member last week, the first drone strike after an eight-week pause. Meanwhile, the Associated Press reports the United States is paying six times as much to send war supplies to troops in Afghanistan after Pakistan closed two key border crossings to NATO convoys. The closings came after a U.S. air strike killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November.

Yesterday, Pakistan’s foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, said the relations with the United States were on hold.

HINA RABBANI KHAR: I would say they are conveniently on hold, until we start re-engaging. If an incident happened in a reaction to that, the government clearly said that we will be looking at, you know, re-evaluation of our terms of engagement with the United States. Now, that re-evaluation process is underway as we speak. So, ’til the time that that re-evaluation process is not complete, we cannot start the re-engagement.

AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, the State Department announced the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, will visit New Delhi on his way to Kabul for talks with President Karzai and other top officials.
For more, we’re joined now by Tariq Ali, British-Pakistani political commentator, historian, activist, filmmaker, novelist. He’s the author of over 20 books, including The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power, as well as The Obama Syndrome: Surrender at Home, War Abroad.
We welcome you to Democracy Now!

TARIQ ALI: Great to be with you.

AMY GOODMAN: First, is a coup imminent in Pakistan?

TARIQ ALI: I don’t think so. I think the military is not interested in pushing for a coup at the moment. They are relying on the Supreme Court to get rid of a corrupt president. And what has happened is that the Supreme Court has instructed the Prime Minister to charge the President with corruption and related crimes, and the Prime Minister has refused. So the Supreme Court is now charging the Prime Minister with contempt of court. That was the last news I got from Pakistan. And the military is going to let all this play out.

JUAN GONZALEZ: But now, the Prime Minister was at first saying that he believed the President had immunity. What is the legal situation in Pakistan of sitting presidents and leaders of the country, in terms of their immunity from prosecution?

TARIQ ALI: Well, there is no immunity, but a national reconciliation ordinance was passed by the assembly on the say-so of the military when the United States sent Benazir Bhutto back. And they said all the politicians’ crimes, financial crimes, the slate would be wiped clean. This was accepted. Now there’s an appeal in the Supreme Court saying that the NRO was illegal, and the Supreme Court has accepted that. So no one—no corrupt politician, in power or out of power, has immunity, if that decision is upheld.

AMY GOODMAN: Earlier this month, the Obama administration unveiled a new military strategy billed as a move toward a leaner, streamlined global U.S. force. The U.S. vows a stepped-up focus on the Asia-Pacific region, as well as the increased use of drone strikes that have targeted militants in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and the Horn of Africa. The plan also touts a reduction in military spending, but only when compared to previous increases. Unveiling the plan at the Pentagon, President Obama said military spending will exceed its levels at the end of the George W. Bush administration’s second term.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: We will be strengthening our presence in the Asia Pacific, and budget reductions will not come at the expense of that critical region. We’re going to continue investing in our critical partnerships and alliances, including NATO, which has demonstrated time and again, most recently in Libya, that it’s a force multiplier. We will stay vigilant, especially in the Middle East. I think it’s important for all Americans to remember, over the past 10 years, since 9/11, our defense budget grew at an extraordinary pace. Over the next 10 years, the growth in the defense budget will slow, but the fact of the matter is this: it will still grow, because we have global responsibilities that demand our leadership. In fact, the defense budget will still be larger than it was toward the end of the Bush administration.

AMY GOODMAN: Tariq Ali, you wrote The Obama Syndrome: Surrender at Home, War Abroad. And included in answering this, talk about what happened with the 24 Pakistani soldiers, the significance of this, and how the U.S. is perceived in Pakistan.

TARIQ ALI: Well, Amy, the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers and the bombing of their checkpoint makes no rational sense at all. The United States did it. They knew it was a military checkpoint. They knew that it was Pakistani soldiers. They haven’t yet been able to come up with any reasonable explanation as to how that happened. So one has to assume that it was deliberate. And this happened roughly at the same period as Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United States, Husain Haqqani, sent a message to the Pentagon saying, "Come and help us against our own army. We’ll do whatever you want," which has become a huge scandal in Pakistan. It’s like a Clancy novel. And the ambassador actually going and pleading. This ambassador has now been removed. Another one has been appointed. So all sorts of things are going on behind the scenes, of which we haven’t yet heard the whole—the whole story is yet to come out.

Pakistani soldiers who survived Nato attack say it was unprovoked attack

Refreshing News

Pakistani soldiers who survived a Nato air strike on two military border posts that killed 24 of their colleagues insisted on Sunday that they had not opened fire across the Afghan border and were the victims of an unprovoked attack by American aircraft.

Pakistani soldiers carry the coffins of their comrades who were killed in a NATO strike during a funeral ceremony in Peshawar

Nato has so far stopped short of apologising for Saturday's early morning raid but has expressed regret for what it termed "a tragic unintended incident", that has taken relations between Islamabad and Washington to the brink of collapse, and prompted furious protests in Pakistani cities.

It is understood that the attack, on two posts near the Afghan-Pakistani border, was carried out during a US and Afghan special forces operation to clear alleged Taliban training camps inside Afghanistan.

Afghan officials on Sunday claimed their forces had called in an air strike after coming under attack from the Pakistani side of the border.

Amirzeb Khan, 23, said the area around the checkpoints, about two miles from the border, had been cleared of militants and the night had been quiet.

The attack, he said, came at about 2am. They counted four helicopters.

"Initially, we thought that the attackers were Taliban and we took positions to retaliate but then saw that at least four helicopters were shelling from above," he said from his bed at the Combined Military Hospital in Peshawar, where he was being treated for shrapnel injuries to his abdomen.

Hameedullah Wazir described a scene of chaos as an apparently indiscriminate rain of rockets exploded around the checkpoint, waking sleeping troops. He said the survivors simply ran.

"We didn't find time to respond as everything took place so quickly that we were unable to fight back," he said.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Nato Secretary General, said the attack was "unacceptable and deplorable".

"I offer my deepest condolences and sympathy to the families of the Pakistani officers and soldiers who lost their lives or were injured, and to the government and people of Pakistan, following the regrettable incident along the Afghan-Pakistani border," he said.

American helicopters have conducted multiple attacks in Pakistan while in "hot pursuit" of Taliban and Haqqani network militants, who use the country's mountainous tribal areas as safe havens after launching cross-border raids.

Yesterday, a local Afghan official accused the Pakistani troops at the border outpost of helping the Taliban.

Afghanistan to back Pakistan if wars with U.S.: Karzai

MSNBC

ISLAMABAD — Afghanistan would support Pakistan in case of military conflict between Pakistan and the United States, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said in an interview to a private Pakistani TV channel broadcast on Saturday.

The remarks were in sharp contrast to recent tension between the two neighbors over cross-border raids, and Afghan accusations that Pakistan was involved in killing the chief Afghan peace envoy, former Afghan president Burhanuddin Rabbani, by a suicide bomber on September 20.

"God forbid, If ever there is a war between Pakistan and America, Afghanistan will side with Pakistan," he said in the interview to Geo television.

"If Pakistan is attacked and if the people of Pakistan needs Afghanistan's help, Afghanistan will be there with you."

Such a situation is extremely unlikely, however. Despite months of tension and tough talk between Washington and Islamabad, the two allies appear to be working to ease tension.

In a two-day visit to Islamabad, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued stern warnings and asked for more cooperation in winding down the war in Afghanistan, but ruled out "boots on the ground" in North Waziristan, where Washington has been pushing Pakistan to tackle the Haqqani network.

The Haqqani are a group of militants Washington has blamed for a series of attacks in Afghanistan, using sanctuaries in the Pakistani tribal region along the Afghan border.

Kerry’s kiss off

 The International News
Anjum Niaz

Do you remember a man with a long face, angular eyes and a shock of salt-and-pepper head? Surely you can recall the authoritative voice, especially when he vowed that Raymond Davis will face a “criminal investigation” if Pakistan let him go. “It is customary in an incident like this for our government to conduct a criminal investigation. That is our law,” promised Senator Kerry. “And I can give you the full assurance of our government today that [it] will take place.”

It never took place! And even if it did (unbeknownst to ordinary mortals) can Senator Kerry, chairman Foreign Relations Senate Committee tell us why after seven months, the CIA killer roams free, given his penchant to hunt humans. His latest victim is a father of two little girls who saw their father being punched, kicked and beaten, causing a vertebrae fracture at a parking lot in Colorado.

There is zero tolerance for assault and battery here. That an American citizen got seriously hurt, (never mind that Pakistani lives and rulers are cheap – three were killed in Lahore yet the US got back its man) the law has moved in. Davis can be in jail for five years! Neither Kerry nor the CIA can save him a second time around.

About the Kerry kiss off – Did the US intelligence agencies skip the senator’s promise he made to Pakistanis; or did he himself balk out once Davis was back in the US?

Top guns at the White House, Congress, State Department, Pentagon, the CIA, and the US military considered Raymond Davis a prize to be saved at any cost. Even if it meant dragging in the House of Saud and asking for King Abdullah to pay blood money to the relatives of the three dead men.

Pakistan diplomat rages on "how we have been treated"

CBS News
Pamela Falk



As Americans mark the 10th anniversary of the Afghanistan conflict, relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan and the U.S. and Pakistan are increasingly strained because of the violent attacks that the Haqqani network, a fierce militant group tied to al Qaeda and based in Pakistan, have brought to the Afghan insurgency, particularly attacks on U.S. troops.

American officials have asserted that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) has ties to the Taliban and to the Haqqani network, although U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta this week said Pakistan has been asked to take action against the Haqqani network where, he said, they take safe haven.

Several reports with dueling statistics reflect the challenges facing the Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai and the difficulties with the tiered handover of security from the NATO-led coalition to the Afghan police and army. The U.N. Secretary-General's recent report, "The situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace and security," says incidents involving armed clashes and improvised explosive devices were up 39 percent compared to the same time last year.
The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) cited a decrease of 2 percent, using different data, an estimated 25 percent fewer incidents than those recorded by the U.N. But both reports attributed around four-fifths of civilian casualties to insurgent attacks - by any accounts, a troubling trend.

U.S.-Pakistan relations are at an all-time low. Pakistan's U.N. Ambassador Abdullah Hussein Haroon, speaking to CBS News about the allegations of Pakistani-ISI links to insurgents, said that Pakistan wants to end terrorism in his country and that Washington and Afghanistan are blaming Pakistan, making it the scapegoat for a conflict which victimizes Pakistan more than it hurts the U.S. or Afghanistan.

"For the past few months it's been the U.S. who keeps trying to put pressure by saying Pakistan this or Pakistan that," Haroon said. "That policy needs reappraisal. You need to talk as allies, don't talk down to us. This is not going to succeed. Politics should be transactional, not coercive. We want success. We don't want this mess on our doorstep for the next 100 years. It's not of our making, not of our choosing, not of our doing. We've paid the highest price for this war."

As the U.S. assesses the projected dates for the drawdown of U.S. troops and the recent spike in some types of violent incidents, a CBS News poll found that, although most Americans support the military, the American public thinks the United States should not be fighting in Afghanistan and the war has not been worth it.

Video: Afghan war takes 2 steps forward, 1 step back

Video: U.S. counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan

Special report: Afghanistan, Ten years later

Pakistan's U.N. Ambassador, who has been in his country's foreign service all his adult life, said bluntly that the U.S. had ignored the lessons of history in deciding to, and how to, invade Afghanistan.

"The Soviets lost Afghanistan by not learning the lessons of history... History is again repeating itself because the Americans have repeated the mistakes made by the Soviets and everyone else."
Haroon said U.S. leaders "overestimated their own capabilities and underestimated those of the Afghan guerillas."

The ambassador accuses the U.S. of underestimating the Taliban.

"I believe this needs to be reassessed because misappreciation of the enemy has always led to military setbacks."

Adding to his list of alleged U.S. failures, Haroon said American military commanders failed to assess the physical terrain on which they were planning to fight.

All the errors, he said, "contributed to the impasse which has resulted in Afghanistan."

As U.S.-Pakistan relations sour and anti-U.S. troop sentiment in Pakistan rises, Haroon offered some advice: "You cannot solve Afghanistan without Pakistan and Pakistan cannot be free of its own troubles without Afghanistan first being free of all its troubles. That is the conundrum."

CIA contractor accused of seriously injuring victim's back in parking lot spat

Denver Post
Felisa Cardona

Former CIA contractor Raymond Davis, right, and his attorney William Frankfurt
arrive at the Douglas County Courthouse in Castle Rock on Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2011.

CASTLE ROCK — Prosecutors increased the assault charges against former CIA contractor Raymond Davis because the victim suffered a compression fracture on his back following an altercation over a parking spot.

Davis, who was charged Monday with second-degree assault following the brawl in the parking lot of Einstein's Bagels in Highlands Ranch, appeared in Douglas County court this morning to hear the charges against him.

Judge Susan Meissner-Cutler set bond at $10,000 and ordered Davis not to possess firearms in Colorado.

He is scheduled to return to court on Dec. 15 for a preliminary hearing.

Davis, 37, works as a firearms training instructor for the federal government in the Washington D.C. area. The judge allowed Davis to use firearms only while he is working.

Prosecutor Rich Orman told the judge he was concerned about the safety of 50-year-old victim Jeffrey Maes considering Davis' history in Pakistan.

Maes watched quietly in the courtroom with his family with a visible red mark across his forehead.
In January, Davis was arrested in Lahore, Pakistan after killing two men he said were trying to rob him. Davis was released in March to the U.S. after $2.3 million was paid to the victim's families.
U.S. officials deny making the payment and the source was never disclosed nor were many details of the shooting.

"Mr. Davis was working for a contractor, but it seems to me there seems to be lot of contractors working for the U.S. government and I don't know of any other individuals who shot two Pakistanis," Orman told the judge while arguing against Davis having access to weapons.

Davis' attorney, William Frankfurt said Orman's assessment of his client's actions in Pakistan is "a lot of speculation and a lot of guessing."

"The two incidents are miles and worlds apart," Frankfurt said. "The incident took place in a war zone."

No weapons were used during the parking lot fight, only fists and profanity, according to an affidavit.
Witnesses told police Maes swooped into a parking spot that Davis was waiting for and that Davis became enraged, got out of his sport-utility vehicle and confronted Maes.

Davis punched Maes in the face, knocking him to the ground, witnesses told police and that Maes' two children and wife were crying and afraid.

The affidavit indicates both men struck each other, but the majority of witnesses said Davis was the aggressor.

Maes told deputies he blacked out and fell to the ground. Another witness told police it's possible Maes stumbled on a curb and landed on some rocks, which could have caused the injuries to his back.
Two other men in the parking lot broke up the fight.

Davis' shirt was torn across the chest and there were finger marks and a bruise on his chest. He told deputies he had injured his knee but declined medical treatment on the way to jail.

Davis admitted to sheriff's deputies that he slapped Maes with an open hand and that he hit Maes first, the affidavit says.

"I don't understand how he can hit me five times and I'm the one going to jail," Davis said to deputies. "The guy got all of his cuts from falling in the rocks."

Medical records show Maes suffered a T11 compression fracture on his middle back.

"His back is extremely stiff and sore but when he turns his head to the right, there is considerable pain in the middle of his back," A deputy said in his report.

CIA Killer Raymond Davis Sends Man To The Hospital Over Starbucks Parking Spot

CIA Operative Raymond Davis Arrested In Colorado After Parking Spot Fight

Editor's Note:  Apparently, Raymond Davis is not a pseudonym.

Siastak


Raymond Davis Was Released From Pakistani Prison In January

HIGHLANDS RANCH, Colo. -- The CIA operative who was freed from a Pakistani prison after the U.S. paid $2.3 million in blood money was arrested Saturday morning in Highlands Ranch after he fought with another man over a parking spot, CALL7 Investigators have learned.

Raymond Davis was arrested outside an Einstein Bagels at the Town Center at Highlands Ranch, at Highlands Ranch Parkway and South Broadway, sources close to the investigation told Call7 Investigator Tony Kovaleski.  Sources told Kovaleski that Davis and another man with him had been arguing with a third man about a parking spot when the verbal argument escalated into a physical altercation.

In the argument, Davis was the aggressor, reliable sources said. The 50-year-old victim was treated at the scene and released.  Deputies with the Douglas County Sheriff's Office were called around 8 a.m.  Davis was taken into custody on misdemeanor charges of third-degree assault and disorderly conduct. He was released after posting $1,750 in bond.  Davis informed responding deputies who he was and said that the press would be following this and would appreciate it if authorities kept his arrest out of the press, according to sources.  The Douglas County Sherriff's Office treated his arrest like any other case, but once they confirmed his identity, the sheriff's office had to follow protocol and notify Colorado's highest ranking law enforcement office, the Colorado Department of Public Safety.  The sheriff's office is still working on a report.Davis was jailed in a Pakistani prison on Jan. 27, after he shot and killed two Pakistani men as he sat in his car.  Davis, a 36-year-old Virginia native, said he shot the two men in self-defense as they tried to rob him in late January.  He claimed the two men attacked him as he drove through a busy Lahore neighborhood.  He was charged with murder and then released after the families of the two Pakistanis he killed pardoned him in exchange for compensation or "blood money."  The payment of "blood money" to the families, sanctioned under Pakistani law, was considered by Davis' attorney as the best way to get out of the crisis.  The killings triggered a fresh wave of anti-American sentiment in Pakistan and were testing an alliance seen as key to defeating al-Qaida and ending the war in Afghanistan.  The tensions were especially sharp between the CIA and Pakistan's powerful Inter Services Intelligence, its spy agency, which said it did not know Davis was operating in the country.  One ISI official said the agency had backed the "blood money" deal as way of soothing tensions.  The United States initially described Davis as either a U.S. consular or embassy official, and claimed he had diplomatic immunity.  But officials later acknowledged he was working for the CIA, confirming suspicions that had aired in the Pakistani media. 7NEWS confirmed Davis owns a security company called Hyperion Protective Consultants, which is contracted to do work for the U.S. government.

Source: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/29362518/detail.html

The Tempest

Pakistan Today
Humayun Gauhar

It took all of nine hours for the heads of all our political parties (except of the two-headed Peoples Party) to come up with the obvious. A child would have taken nine minutes to write the resolution of the All Parties Conference. But that was not the point of the gathering to meet the gathering storm. The point was to show unity in the face of adversity. But it will only have meaning if they do what they say and don’t go scampering off to US officialdom to reinforce their own utility to America. Don’t bank on it. Our history of broken promises and backstabbing is legion. In less than 24 hours the heads of two parties started making negative noises. And President Obama reiterated his resolve to pursue the same policies.

Oddly, General Musharraf’s party was not invited, although it has been reported in this newspaper that he has been requested to mediate with the US to avert the possible storm.

Pakistan-US relations, tenuous at the best of times, started unraveling with the Raymond Davis affair and touched the bottom with the May 2 Abbottabad caper. Tensions reached their zenith when the outgoing Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Admiral Mike Mullen said to Congress that the ‘Haqqani Network’ is a “veritable arm” of the ISI. Relations plunged to their nadir. He raised not a storm in a teacup but a tempest in a teapot. Emotions rose. There was uproar. There was speculation galore – will they, won’t they attack us? No surprise in a relationship historically based on two-way hypocrisy – America regularly using, abusing and discarding us because of which we are never fully on the same page as them and, quite naturally, look out for our own interests, not America’s interests alone. Problem is that the way we have looked after our interests was not always in our interests. The lesson for both is: don’t get into partnership with someone who you don’t quite understand.

Our relations are at a crossroads. Question is: which path will we take, the path less trodden upon or the well-worn one? We have always taken the latter though it has never taken us in the right direction. In any case, for a country that calls itself Islamic there is only one path to take, the Correct Path or Sirat-al-Mustahqeem. But such things are today consigned to the bookshelf, rarely to be read and hardly ever understood.

Let’s try and understand why America seems so desperate, why it is doing what it is doing are and what are the compulsions and demons driving it.

1. America is in election mode and President Obama, with his ratings at rock bottom, is desperate to win them. Thus his decisions are driven not so much by his mind but by his ambition.

2. The US political system is in logjam, unable to come up with strategies to meet crises.

3. Its economy is in terminal decline, joblessness is rife and it is in recession, which could soon become depression.

4. It has lost the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the ‘War on Terror’ overall but is still desperate to retain powerful military presences in both countries.

5. America cannot find any exit without Pakistan, just as the Soviets couldn’t. This makes it even more frustrated.

6. America’s influence is seriously eroding in the world, most particularly the Arab and Muslim world.

7. The recent attack on the US embassy in Kabul and one of its military installations by a handful of people has embarrassed America in the eyes of its own people, who are rightly asking how this could happen after the expenditure of billions of dollars over ten years.

8. To deflect the blame, America blames Pakistan for ‘helping’ the ‘Haqqani Network’ to carry out the attacks. When people are embarrassed they look for scapegoats. We are the scapegoats.

9. America has every right to talk to its adversaries, be it the Taliban, the Haqqanis or even Al-Qaeda, but lack of realisation of its twin defeats makes it talk from a position of strength, not realising that only victors can do that. Losers cannot. Thus it makes unrealistic demands like retaining military bases after ‘withdrawal’, which is comical.

10. By the same token, we too have equal right to talk to these groups without America going ape, which it doesn’t seem to understand.

America wants Pakistan to take action in North Waziristan against the ‘Haqqani Network’ and other militant groups. Pakistan doesn’t want to open yet another front in an impossible terrain with harsh winters nigh. The Haqqanis are Afghans and thus freedom fighters. Why should Pakistan go after them, even granting that they are mainly in North Waziristan and not in Afghanistan itself? America’s gambit is that if we launch an operation in North Waziristan, the militants there would turn their attention away from Afghanistan and train their guns on Pakistan.

The first and foremost duty of any government is to protect the lives, liberty and property of its people and the sovereignty, dignity and integrity of its country. This includes not only all the three branches of government – legislature, executive and judiciary – but also the opposition. Failure is not an option.

No government can succeed without co-opting its people. The government and the people must stand firm together as one, like in 1965. The media then played a pivotal role.

In any impending confrontation, while it is important to know one’s own and the adversary’s strengths, it is vital to know one’s weaknesses and the adversary’s weaknesses too. Our two biggest weaknesses are our economic fragility and the nature of our present role in the so-called War on Terror that our people at large do not approve of. How to create self-reliance and economic strength needs another article. But it is important to create the perception that the civilian government and the military are on the same track, a perception that has sadly been lacking, whether true or not. Thus politicians must speak with one voice on this issue and say the same thing in public. This is not the time for politicking and point scoring. We cannot say the wrong or contradictory thing and then excuse ourselves by claiming that it was our personal opinion.

Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani was right when he said that “America cannot live with us and it cannot live without us.” Nothing could be closer to the truth. However, if we look at it carefully, this also applies to us. Statesmanship demands that America and Pakistan should reset their relationship based on mutual interest, not on the one-way self-interest that America has always foisted on us, and which has brought our relations to breaking point. Neither should expect, much less demand, of the other to do that which is not in its interest. Only then can we have a healthy relationship for the first time in our history.

American-Pakistani Diplomatic Crisis: Pakistani Federal Interior Minister Says CIA Created Haqqani Terrorist Network

IntelHub
Madison Ruppert

Federal Interior Minister, Rehman Malik:
Haqqani network is a creation of the CIA

The state of U.S.-Pakistani relations is growing increasingly grim as a covert and overt diplomatic crisis develops between America and Pakistan, represented by heated rhetoric coming from both sides and the growing involvement of outside entities like China and the Saudis.

This is emerging in several ways including a meeting between Pakistani Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir and U.S. Ambassador Cameron Munter, meetings between senior Saudi intelligence authorities and the chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI), meetings between Chinese Vice Prime Minister Meng Jianzhu and senior Pakistani civilian and military leaders, and most notably the accusation coming from Pakistan’s Federal Interior Minister, Rehman Malik, that the Haqqani network is a CIA creation, not a Pakistani one.

Furthermore, a meeting between Pakistani Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and British Defense Secretary Liam Fox has been “postponed indefinitely” due to “the current situation [in Pakisan]”.

A Pakistani news outlet, The Express Tribune, chalks this up to continued in-house talks about the American pressure on Pakistan regarding alleged ISI support for the Haqqani terrorist network.

The critiques coming from America have been harsh, including a statement at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace by Admiral Mike Mullen just days before he is to step down as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in which he said that the ISI has “been supporting proxies for an extended period of time. The Haqqani piece of this has got to be reversed.”

In no uncertain terms, Mullen accused the Pakistani version of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of directly supporting terrorists for an extended period of time.

He also stated before the Senate Armed Services Committee that, “The Haqqani network … acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Agency. With ISI support, Haqqani operatives planned and conducted that truck bomb attack, as well as the attack on our embassy.

We also have credible intelligence that they were behind the June 28 attack on the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul as well as a host of other smaller but effective operations.”

This type of language marks a significant new stage in the deteriorating diplomatic relationship between Islamabad and Washington.

In fact, a September 24^th editorial published by the Pakistani news outlet, The Nation, said that “in the face of a virtual declaration of war by top U.S. officials, unity and solidarity among all segments of [Pakistani] society is the only thing that can avert the danger.”

Clearly the people of Pakistan, right or wrong, perceive these statements from Mullen and other U.S. officials as a direct threat against their sovereign nation.

Some are now saying that the Saudis are now being leveraged as an intermediary between Washington and Islamabad.

The Pakistani Express Tribune is reporting that Pakistani Lt. General Ahmed Shuja Pasha met with Saudi intelligence officials at the Chaklala Airbase while mentioning that some media reports are claiming that the ISI chief traveled to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia for more consultations after a “crucial” meeting with Saudi intelligence officers.

A senior military official in Pakistan confirmed that there was a delegation of Saudi intelligence officials visiting Islamabad while claiming that it was unrelated to the rift in Pakistani-American relations.

The official also said that the ISI chief did not rush off to Saudi Arabia as some reports posited, saying simply that, “We [the Pakistanis] have counter-terrorism cooperation with the US and the visit was part of that cooperation”.

There is clearly some backpedaling going on after the clearly harsh statements regarding Pakistani ties to the Haqqani network.

In describing a meeting between the American Ambassador and Pakistani Foreign Secretary Bashir, the US Embassy spokesperson, Mark Stroh, said, “It was a regular meeting but also indicates the fact that Pakistan and the US have a broad-based relationship,” effectively downplaying the diplomatic crisis currently unfolding.

These moves are quite understandable given the fact that the United States is likely attempting to do whatever possible to keep Pakistan and China from getting even closer than they already are amidst fears that Pakistan will break ties with the US in favor of China.

The Pakistani Interior Minister, Rehman Malik, said that “China is always there for us,” something he might not be able to say about the United States.

The spokesman for the Pakistani President, Farhatullah Babar presented similar sentiments by saying, “The Chinese leader reaffirmed China’s continuing support for Pakistan in its fight against militancy and the promotion of regional peace and stability”.

Again, it is not likely that Babar would be able to say that same about the United States given the fact that whenever a possible terrorist attack occurs in the region fingers are quickly pointed at Pakistan.
Babar also stated, “The President said that Pakistan greatly appreciates China’s support for Pakistan on all issues of major concern.

He said that the Chinese role was very important to usher in a new era of peace and stability in the region,” but is America playing an important role in ushering in a new era of peace or are we playing an important role in maintaining an era of war and violence?

Unfortunately for the United States, I believe that many Pakistanis see it as the latter and the statement from the Federal Interior Minister that the CIA actually created and trained the Haqqani network reflects this.

Pakistan warns that U.S. accusations may cost Washington an ally

Islamabad denies it helped militants attack U.S. troops and officials in Afghanistan. 'You cannot afford to alienate Pakistan,' Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar says.

Reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan—

Pakistani officials warned Friday that they could jettison the United States as an ally if American officials continued to accuse Islamabad's intelligence agency of assisting a leading Afghan Taliban group in recent attacks in Afghanistan.

Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar cautioned the U.S. against airing allegations such as the blunt charge of collusion between Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency, known as ISI, and the militant Haqqani network made Thursday by Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

"You cannot afford to alienate Pakistan; you cannot afford to alienate the Pakistani people," Khar said in New York, speaking to a Pakistani television channel. She was in the U.S. for the U.N. General Assembly session.

Pakistani army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani in a statement called Mullen's remarks "very unfortunate and not based on facts."

Pakistani officials continued to tersely reject the allegations and challenged the U.S. to furnish evidence of ties between the country's intelligence community and the Haqqani group.

Mullen called the Haqqani network "a veritable arm" of the ISI and said the intelligence agency helped Haqqani militants during attacks Sept. 13 on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul as well as a truck bomb blast in Wardak province three days earlier that injured 77 American troops.

U.S. military officers and former officials say ISI communicated with Afghan insurgents who attacked the U.S. Embassy and NATO headquarters nearby and appears to have provided them with equipment.

Estimated to number more than 10,000 fighters, the Haqqani network uses Pakistan's North Waziristan tribal region along the Afghan border to launch suicide bombings, commando-style assaults and other strikes on U.S., Afghan and North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces in eastern Afghanistan and in the capital, Kabul.

The group has never carried out any attacks against targets in Pakistan. The country's links with the Haqqani network date to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, when the ISI backed the group's founder, Jalaluddin Haqqani, and other resistance fighters.

Mullen's allegations probably will widen the chasm between Pakistan and the U.S., tenuous allies whose mutual mistrust deepened considerably this year. The U.S. commando raid in May that killed Osama bin Laden in the city of Abbottabad raised questions in Washington about whether elements of the Pakistan's intelligence agencies knew that the Al Qaeda leader had been hiding for five years just a few miles north of the capital, Islamabad. The January arrest of CIA contractor Raymond Davis, accused of shooting to death two Pakistani men he said were trying to rob him, sparked fear among Pakistanis that scores of CIA operatives were secretly roaming the country.

To get Pakistan to act against the Haqqani network, Washington has signaled a willingness to link future financial aid with Islamabad's cooperation against extremists, and has hinted that it could even mount some kind of unilateral, targeted strike on Haqqani strongholds in Pakistani territory.

In Karachi, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told reporters that the onus was on Washington to pull back and begin mending frayed relations between the two countries.

"They can't live with us; they can't live without us," Gilani said. "So I would say to them that if they can't live without us, they should increase contacts with us to remove misunderstandings."

Security analyst Javed Hussain, a retired Pakistani brigadier, said a U.S. strike on Haqqani would backfire, given the array of militant groups beyond the Haqqani network that also use North Waziristan as a base of operations.

"It would be a strategic blunder," Hussain said. "North Waziristan is a hornet's nest.... They would all converge and coordinate activities against the U.S. Can [Defense Secretary Leon E.] Panetta or President Obama afford to open another front under the present circumstances? If he does, good luck to him."

Experts say no measure may be enough to prod Pakistan's security establishment into severing ties with the Haqqani group. The military views the militant network as a valuable asset in a post-U.S. Afghanistan to prevent nuclear archrival India from extending its influence to Kabul. Pakistan's military and intelligence chiefs have always regarded India, and not Islamic extremists, as their primary enemy.

Pakistan's military leaders, says security analyst and former Pakistani Gen. Talat Masood, "do feel that the policy they are pursuing is, in the long term, in their interest.... There are others in Pakistan who believe this association with the Haqqani network is extremely detrimental to Pakistan's interests. But they are in the minority."

‘Hard and comprehensive’ – study reveals extent of US drone strikes

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism
Chris Woods

CIA drone strikes have led to far more deaths in Pakistan than previously understood, according to extensive new research published by the Bureau. More than 160 children are among at least 2,292 people reported killed in US attacks since 2004. There are credible reports of at least 385 civilians among the dead.

In a surprise move, a US counter-intelligence official has also released the CIA’s internal estimates of numbers killed. The Bureau understands that the CIA internally claims it has killed an estimated 2,050 in drone strikes – of whom ‘only 50 are non-combatants’.

Reassessment

The Bureau’s fundamental reassessment of the covert US campaign involved a complete re-examination of all that is known about each US drone strike.

‘The Obama administration must explain the legal basis for drone strikes in Pakistan to avoid the perception that it acts with impunity. The Pakistan government must also ensure accountability for indiscriminate killing, in violation of international law, that occurs inside Pakistan,’
Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International

The study is based on close analysis of credible materials: some 2,000 media reports; witness testimonies; field reports of NGOs and lawyers; secret US government cables; leaked intelligence documents, and relevant accounts by journalists, politicians and former intelligence officers.

The Bureau’s findings are published in a 22,000-word database which covers each individual strike in Pakistan in detail. A powerful search engine, an extensive time-line and search-able maps accompany the data.

The result is the clearest public understanding so far of the CIA’s covert drone war against the militants. Yet US intelligence officials are understood to be briefing against the Bureau’s work, claiming ‘significant problems with its numbers and methodologies.’

Iain Overton, the Bureau’s editor said: ‘It comes as no surprise that the US intelligence services would attack our findings in this way. But to claim our methodology is problematic before we had even published reveals how they really operate. A revelation that is reinforced by the fact that they cannot bring themselves to refer to non-combatants as what they really are: civilians and, all too often, children’.

Many more strikes
The Bureau’s data reveals many more CIA attacks on alleged militant targets than previously reported. At least 291 US drone strikes are now known to have taken place since 2004.

The intended targets – militants in the tribal areas – appear to make up the majority of those killed. There are 126 named militants among the dead since 2004, though hundreds are unknown, low-ranking fighters. But as many as 168 children have also been reported killed among at least 385 civilians.

More than 1,100 people are also revealed to have been injured in the US drone attacks – the first time this number has been collated.

In the wake of the Bureau’s findings Amnesty International has called for more CIA transparency. ‘The Obama administration must explain the legal basis for drone strikes in Pakistan to avoid the perception that it acts with impunity. The Pakistan government must also ensure accountability for indiscriminate killing, in violation of international law, that occurs inside Pakistan,’ said Amnesty’s Director of Asia Pacific Sam Zarifi.

The Bureau’s key findings

* 291 CIA attacks have taken place in Pakistan – 8% more than previously reported. Under President Obama alone there have been 236 strikes – one every four days.

* Between 2,292 and 2,863 people are reported to have died in the attacks – most of them militants

* The minimum number of reported deaths is far higher than previously believed – with 40% more recorded casualties. Most of those killed are likely to be low-ranking militants.

* 126 named militants have so far been killed.

* The Bureau has collated credible news reports of 385-775 civilians being killed in the attacks.

* The Bureau has identified credible reports of 164 children killed in the drone strikes. Under President Bush, one in three of all attacks is reported to have killed a child.

* For the first time the Bureau has compiled accurate details of recorded injuries in drone strikes, revealing that at least 1,114 people have been wounded.

Civilian deaths
With the US military unable to operate overtly inside Pakistan, the Obama administration has come to rely heavily on CIA drone strikes to attack alleged militants in the country’s western tribal areas. To date, at least 236 drone attacks have been ordered in Obama’s name, the Bureau’s research shows.

At least 1,842 people have been reported killed in the Obama strikes, most of them militants.

Recently, Obama’s chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan stated that the president has ‘insisted’ that Pakistan drone strikes ‘do not put… innocent men, women and children in danger’. Yet at least 218 of those killed in drone attacks in Obama’s time in office may have been civilians.

More than 160 children are among at least 2,292 people reported killed in US attacks since 2004. There are credible reports of at least 385 civilians among the dead.

Civilian casualties do seem to have declined in the past year. Yet the Bureau still found credible evidence of at least 45 civilians killed in some ten strikes in this time. The US continues to insist that it ‘can’t confirm any noncombatant casualties’ in the past year.

The most recently reported civilian fatality was on July 12. Abdul Jalil, a migrant worker home on leave from Dubai, was ‘collateral damage’ when the CIA attacked a car carrying eight alleged militants, the Bureau’s researchers in Waziristan report.

Internal CIA figures
The CIA’s own internal estimates of those killed in the drone strikes total about 2,050, the Bureau has learnt. The Agency is understood to claim that all but 50 of these are militants, and that no ‘non-combatants’ have died in the past year. The Bureau’s own minimum suggested casualty figure is 2,292.

Yet a US counter-terrorism official told the Bureau that its numbers were ‘way off the mark’. The Washington-based official said: ‘These actions target militants planning actively to kill Afghans, Pakistanis, Europeans, and Americans among others, and most often the operations occur when they’re training or on the move, getting ready to attack. Over 4,000 Pakistani civilians have been killed by terrorists since 2009—the threat is clear and real.’

Reprieve, the legal action charity which campaigns on human rights issues said: ’With the Bureau’s findings, at last we have a hard and comprehensive look at the facts. It is a great start. From now on, Reprieve hopes people will read official propaganda about drone warfare with a grain of salt—and ask themselves whether drones are radicalizing as many young men as Guantánamo did.’

Help Us Transmit This Story

  Add to Your Blogger Account
  Put it On Facebook
  Tweet this post
  Print it from your printer
  Email and a collection of other outlets
  Try even more services

US and internationalism

 The International News
Brian Cloughley

At least we now know Pakistan’s standing with the US government: slightly above Burkina Faso but below Outer Mongolia. Recent statements about Pakistan by central figures in Washington have made it clear that the US demands and expects nothing but total obedience and subservience from those nations unfortunate enough to be associated with it. It’s similar to the way Rupert Murdoch has treated successive British governments – with a combination of insolent menace and patronising disdain.

US international influence is immense, but Washington chooses to ignore the fact that power should involve responsibility. It is apparent that internationalism is acceptable to the US government only if America’s authoritarian dominance is unquestioned.

On July 10 the New York Times reported that “the Obama administration is suspending and, in some cases, cancelling hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to the Pakistani military, in a move to chasten Pakistan for expelling American military trainers and to press its army to fight militants more effectively.” The story was fed to the NYT by the usual anonymous sources who were “congressional, Pentagon and other administration officials granted anonymity to discuss the politically delicate matter.” In other words, the campaign of anti-Pakistan invective has the direct authorisation of Mr Obama and Congress. The gloves are off, and outright bullying is official policy.

But the discarded gloves of Washington are somewhat bloodstained. Take, for example, the case of the CIA ‘contractor’ Raymond Davis who went free after murdering two Pakistani citizens. This squalid affair encapsulated Washington’s attitude to internationalism and to Pakistan in particular. Imagine what would have happened if an ISI employee – or any foreigner – had shot dead two Americans on the streets of New York. There would have been hysteria throughout the country, and not the slightest possibility that the killer might ever be released. The frenzy of the media and Congress would have equalled the post 9/11 passion. But the CIA can, with impunity, kill people on the streets of a nation which the US treats as a petty puppet, even going so far as to proclaim that the Pakistan Army does not fight militants “effectively”, which is not just grossly insulting, but also sheer nonsense.

Since the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001-2002, before which Pakistan had no suicide bombings and no insurrection in the tribal areas or Taliban terror attacks in its cities, the army has suffered the deaths of over 3,000 soldiers at the hands of extremists, which is double the number that the US has had killed in Afghanistan. And now Pakistan has over 140,000 troops in the west of the country fighting a war that was caused directly by the influx of militants from Afghanistan after the US Crusade.

The current instability in Pakistan is almost entirely the responsibility of the US whose politicians and generals whine that Pakistan is “not doing enough” and which intends to “press its army to fight militants more effectively.” (The Pakistan army’s decisive defeat of the Taliban in the Swat region in 2009 is ignored because it doesn’t fit in with the propaganda.)

The insults don’t stop at accusing Pakistan’s soldiers of incompetence. The senior military figure in the US, Admiral Mullen, appeared intent on denigrating the country’s leaders with his bizarre declaration that the vile murder of Saleem Shahzad, the brilliant investigative journalist, “was sanctioned by the government” of Pakistan. This is a statement with grave implications of criminality. The US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has made a public proclamation to the effect that the government of Pakistan authorises murder. To make such an important pronouncement requires solid intelligence, so incontrovertible evidence must exist that details precisely how and by whom Saleem Shahzad was killed, and on exactly whose orders the murder was committed.

The crime has international connotations, in that one country has declared another responsible for an action that is patently in violation of the principles of International Law, because the alleged offending nation, Pakistan, could be guilty of a crime against humanity. So International Law and procedures should now be invoked, and the evidence that has been gathered by the United States must be produced to the world at large.

US suspends $800m in Pakistan military aid

Editors note:   See how U.S. State Department officials have amnesia over Raymond Davis.

Al Jazeera

Obama aide confirms newspaper report on withholding of almost a third of $2.7bn in security assistance. The US is withholding some $800 million in aid to Pakistan, almost a third of the $2.7bn in security assistance it provides each year to the South Asian nation, Barack Obama's chief of staff has confirmed. Relations between the key allies, always tricky, have drastically deteriorated since US commandos shot and killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden on May 2 in a Pakistani garrison town, sowing distrust on both sides. Last month, Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, warned that the US would slow down military aid to Pakistan unless it took unspecified steps to help the US. Now, it appears, it has, as William Daley, the president's chief of staff, confirmed a New York Times report that the administration was suspending and, in certain cases, cancelling some $800m of military aid. "They've taken some steps that have given us reason to pause on some of the aid which we're giving to the military, and we're trying to work through that," Daley told ABC TV station's This Week With Christiane Amanpour programme. "The truth of the matter is, our relationship with Pakistan is very complicated. "Obviously there's still a lot of pain that the political system in Pakistan is feeling by virtue of the raid that we did to get Osama bin Laden. "Something that the president felt strongly about. We have no regrets over. "The Pakistani relationship is difficult, but it must be made to work over time. But until we get through these difficulties, we'll hold back some of the money that the American taxpayers have committed to give." The suspended aid includes about $300m to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border, according to the New York Times, which broke the story late on Saturday. In addition, the newspaper said, hundreds of millions of dollars in training assistance and military hardware are also being withheld. Intensifying debate The moves come amid intensifying debate within the Obama administration about how best to change the behavior of one of Washington's most important counterterrorism allies. While Pakistan is a crucial ally in the hunt for al-Qaeda and a major supply route to provision US troops in Afghanistan, its powerful military intelligence services have long been suspected of ties with armed Muslim groups.