Thinking About Danny Pearl

Pawn Sacrifice -- Positional Game

by Joachim Martillo

Here is some recent stuff from Judea Pearl, which more or less shows where his mind is.

• Israel @ 60: Confronting denial
  
• From the Dust of History.

Anyone that believes the early Zionist settlers were just emigrating to Palestine in order to live peacefully with the native population is on really stern drugs. (See Kovel Pulls No Punches and Not Just an Ordinary Lobby.)

Israeli advocacy organizations and Israeli consulates have been monitoring US news organizations since the 1950s. They have fairly complete information. Zionist surveillance of US media and government officials is quite thorough. A few years ago AIPAC came to Harvard to recruit congressional summer interns from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government to spy their employers and report back any thoughts deviating from the Zionistically correct.

From the moment Benazir Bhutto and the PPP lost power in Pakistan, Benazir and her operatives were working hard on proving that the PPP is the most Jew-friendly party to rule Pakistan. No Bhutto aide has been more zealous in pandering AIPAC and Jewish groups than Hussein Haqqani, who is the new Pakistani ambassador to the USA.

In the aftermath of 9/11, the primary effort of Benazir's people in the USA was undermining the relationship between Musharaf and Washington.

The killing of Danny Pearl focused a lot of people in the US government (especially Neocons) on the idea that Musharaf had to go, and a more friendly (PPP) regime had to be put in place in Pakistan.

Why was Danny Pearl the victim and not Richard Behar?

Danny was a prominent Wall Street Journal reporter just as Richard was prominent at Fortune.

They were covering the same story of radicals and extremists in Pakistan for their respective publications during the same time period.

Online information about Danny Pearl's great-grandfather Chaim Perl was almost guaranteed to enrage Danny's captors far more than the story of the department store that Richard's Cicurel relatives used to own in Egypt.

Danny Pearl's online background information tells that he worked on behalf of Russian Refuseniks, who were an early Neocon cause. Daniel Pipes in particular might have felt a special connection to Danny Pearl.

Perhaps Zionist operatives passed the info along to PPP agents -- maybe even to impress on them how important it was to save Danny. Instead, the PPP does a calculation and passes the info along to the captors through Bhutto connections in the Pakistani intelligence service and military. The captors spend some time online, put together some questions for Danny, become enraged, and kill him.

The Zionists get a new Ann Frank for the War on Terror. Judea Pearl becomes a foil for Rachel Corrie's parents. The process of undermining Musharraf gets a big boost, and, a few months after Danny Pearl's killing, David Frum told me that Pakistan and especially Musharraf constitute a big liability in the War on Terror.

Now after five years of efforts by Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto, and US government factions, Musharraf has been severely weakened while Haqqani becomes Pakistani Ambassador to the USA.

It works out great from the standpoint of Israel Advocates, the Neocons, the PPP, and the State of Israel.

For rising powers within the PPP like Haqqani, the situation could not be better. Benazir is dead, and people like Haqqani can rise much faster within the PPP while Musharraf and Sharif are destined for a real know-down drag-out within a year or so.

In chess, I would call this a positional game based on the sacrifice of a pawn. In the history of Zionism, such gambits are fairly frequent and not uncommon in the politics of the Indian subcontinent.

Am I a paranoid conspiracy theorist?

Why are Her Majesty Queen Noor of Jordan and Sari Nusseibeh lending their names to give credibility to the fanatic ramblings of a racist Jewish Zionist extremist like Judea Pearl?

If they want to memorialize a comparable deserving figure, shouldn't they think about Rachel Corrie?

Sphere: Related Content

Poverty Fuels Extremism by Husain Haqqani (War on Terror in Pakistan)

Is Husain Haqqani trying to provide an ideological justification for a US intervention or even occupation of Pakistan? 

Shouldn't Haqqani perhaps have mentioned Pakistan's nuclear weaponry and delivery capabilities?

The Hudson Institute, which employs Haqqani, is a fanatic Neocon think-tank associated with racist ethnic Ashkenazi American ideologues and subversives like Norman "Bomb-Iran" Podhoretz.

In the article below Haqqani confuses international militancy associated with ideological opposition to US foreign policy and Zionist crimes with the potential for a Pakistani national revolution against economic inequality and political powerlessness. 

Anti-US anti-Israel militancy does not correlate with poverty, but using the rubric of Islamist extremism or radicalism to confuse legitimate international anti-Israelism with possible anti-government local revolutionary activities of the poor and disenfranchised could easily deceive Israel-centric Neocon policy makers and might enable Haqqani or associates to make a power grab in the context of a Chalabi-style confidence scam on the US government in association with costly almost certainly ineffective longterm US military expansion and escallation into Pakistan.

http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=5074

Poverty Fuels Extremism

From the August 2, 2007 Gulf News

August 9, 2007
by Husain Haqqani

Once again, extremist Islamist radicals in Pakistan have exposed the inadequacies of the Pakistani state. Notwithstanding the state's show of strength, just a few days ago at Islamabad's Lal Masjid (Red Mosque), the radicals had the upper hand when the mosque reopened after repairs.

Supporters of the detained cleric Maulana Abdul Aziz took over the mosque again and rioted violently. The radical extremists showed such strength in Islamabad so soon after the much publicised and high casualty military operation of a few days ago. One can only imagine their capability in the remote mountainous parts of Balochistan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which everyone knows as extremist strongholds. If the events in Islamabad were not enough to highlight the dire straits that Pakistan finds itself, the latest US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) pointed out the absolute failure of Pakistan's strategy in the war against terrorism. It noted that Al Qaida has reorganised itself from safe havens in Pakistan.

The NIE could well be wrong, as US intelligence has sometimes proven to be, but its release has created the spectre of direct military strikes against alleged Al Qaida safe havens on Pakistani soil.

The challenge of terrorists within the country and the threat of a superpower ally using military force on Pakistani soil because it distrusts Pakistan's own capabilities should have served as a wake up call for Pakistan's leadership. Instead, General Pervez Musharraf is still dragging his feet over sharing power and allowing civilians with a popular power base to help him (and Pakistan) out of its tough spot.

Inability
Several politicians and political commentators, too, are proving their inability to overcome their prejudice (for example the dislike some have for the Bhutto family) in favour of a constitutional-institutional arrangement that allows elected civilians to run the country again without confrontation with the country's army.

As for the army, its leadership's vision also remains limited to conventional balance of power concepts. Pakistan's elite appears oblivious to the country's slow hemorrhaging.

Government economists cite increasing mobile phone use and expanding sales of motorcycles and cars as signs of progress and speak of the privatisation programme being a regional success.

Pakistan's elite now drives around in Porsches, more of which have been sold in the city of Lahore alone than the car's manufacturer had envisaged for the entire country. The pace of construction for new country clubs, golf clubs and luxury hotels also reflects growing prosperity of a select few.

Pakistan reveals multiple realities and the temptation to let optimism prevail is great. But, in essence, Pakistan has a high level of dysfunction and unpredictability.

A former Pakistani finance minister and World Bank economist recently told a roundtable on Pakistan in Washington DC that in most countries 6-8 per cent economic growth should translate into reduction in poverty by 10 per cent. He said that trickle down does not seem to be working in Pakistan as 6-8 per cent growth rates have not reduced poverty at the rate of the global average.

Pakistan's growth is not creating jobs and is not helping alleviate poverty at a rapid pace. He estimated that 65 million Pakistanis live in absolute poverty while another 65 million live in poverty. Only 30 million Pakistanis are well-to-do.

The well-to-do often ignore the rage and anger brewing among the poor, who will be particularly vulnerable to extremist ideologies if political inclusion does not replace the current system of oligarchic rule.

Nothing short of a complete overhaul of the state structure under elected democratic leadership, based on rule of law and well-defined roles for all institutions, will bring Pakistan from the brink where it currently finds itself.

Husain Haqqani serves as co-chair of Hudson's Islam and Democracy Project.

©Copyright 2006 Hudson Institute. All Rights Reserved

Sphere: Related Content