No Oscar for Osama Bin Laden's home videos

You've been badly framed!

The White House has taken great delight in releasing some boring videos that they found in the Bin Laden compound. There aren't many laughs in them, so the comedy element is lacking. The wardrobe department is also rather lacklustre. All we see is Osama rambling on about the ills of the world as he sees it. His compound looks an untidy mess. I doubt he got his electrical wiring checked. It looked highly dangerous on the pictures. He could have set the house on fire just with his VCR collection.

No doubt all this plays well in America. President Obama's poll ratings have rocketed, all because of this feel good factor. But Bin Laden's death isn't going to help the deficit one iota. Americans are still fighting a war in Afghanistan on the ludicrous basis that he was thought to be there but he isn't there now because he's dead. He never was there, or at least not since 9/11. Pakistan was always going to be his best bet for a man as corrupt as he was knows a thing or two about corruption in a country like Pakistan. Also, he could have been bombed with impunity in Afghanistan if found out. Not so easy in Pakistan. He just didn't reckon with the navy seals. Neither did Pakistan for that matter.

al Qaeda is like some spore carrying fungus, popping up here and there where the ground is reasonably fertile. But it is also fast becoming a footnote in history. None of the franchised cells are having any influence in the Arab Spring. The vast majority of Muslims find the organisation objectionable. al Qaeda remains a threat but no more than it did last week when Osama Bin Laden was still checking over his video collection.

With the arch-terrorist dead, what now for the war in Afghanistan. The training seems to be taking for ever. Surely the Afghan police know how to make arrests by now? The Afghan army can shoot straight and obey commands, surely? The Taliban were never our enemy. They might have been the enemy of freedom for Afghans, but history tells us the Afghans are better off fighting amongst themselves. The only problem left is the wretched poppy crop and President Obama has done as much as his predecessor on this one. Diddly squat!

Afghanistan's poppy harvest by CNN_International

Heroin use down

I heard on the Today Programme that heroin use is down. This is partly due apparently to the poppy fields of Afghanistan not producing so much. The crop spraying has been a failure. In fact, the whole Afghan adventure is a disaster. The Taliban is not our enemy as such. However, the drug barons are. If the two are mixed up together then both are against us. But I suspect the powers-that-be are not that bothered about it all. If they were they would have destroyed those poppy fields years ago.

Bagsamoney Karsai in Kabul cash heist!

The leader of Afghanistan, that green-caped Karsai, has admitted to receiving bag loads of cash from that scruffy minicab driver lookalike who runs Iran. Karsai airily brushes aside questions that this method of receiving money is a bit iffy. He says it is perfectly in order as it's the way its done in this part of the world. The Americans have given this ballot-rigger sack loads too apparently. It's outrageous. Karsai struts around as some kind of elite yet when it suits him to get involved in cash smuggling he suggests this is an Afghan tradition. Complete and utter rubbish. Why not have a bank, a proper bank with a proper accounting system. If he poo-poos Western ones, let him use an Islamic one.

We've asked our soldiers to die so that this guy can do everything that democracy isn't suppose to do. It stinks. If I were advising the American high command, I'd suggest they took some of the bags and paid to have those poppy crops sprayed. We've got to end this nonsense right now.

Harry Enfield had a character in the 80's called Loadsamoney, who was a pretty awful character. Perhaps he could take on Bagsamoney and show this modern day Afghan counting house king up for what he really is.

British Army has "mosques" in firing line!

Just as the General Election hots up and gets into first gear we hear of another idiocy from the high command of the British Army. A Muslim group has demanded an apology from the Army after it emerged that replica mosques were being used on a North Yorkshire firing range. In response, a spokesman said, "We have no intention of offending religious sensibilities."

But I think this beggars belief. Did it not occur to some bigwig to think first? Maybe a question like "If we build replica mosques on a firing range and get squaddies to take aim at them, will that be a good idea?". Something along those lines. Maybe it was never discussed. Or if it was, some Corporal Colonel Square boomed out and those with doubts were silenced immediately.

When it comes to election time, idiots and their idiocies are never difficult to find. It just makes me wonder if the part of the human race that occupies the British Isles will ever learn. I've long thought the wrong people get to the top.

One simple question would have been to ask whether it would look good if the Saudi army had done a similar thing with churches. An Army spokesman went on, "Providing the best training facilities for our armed forces ahead of deployment to operational theatres is a priority for us. Facilities at Bellerby have been upgraded in response to operational feedback from Afghanistan as it is crucial that our armed forces train at ranges that replicate the environment they will be deployed to." Sounds good, but those cardboard cutout mosques hardly replicate the environment. And in any event, such an enterprise just creates more problems, as this one has done.

Sir Jock stirs it up over Afghan mission

Only this last week, the hapless Gordon Brown was telling us all about that nasty Alky Ada he keeps on about. Well, today Sir Jock Stirrup rode into town to appear on the Andrew Marr Show.
He said, amongst other things, this -

"It is true that al-Queda are not operating in Afghanistan at the moment. It is also true that over the last couple of years in particular the al-Queda core has suffered significant damage".

Not in Afghanistan? Where are they, then? Oh, don't tell me, it's Pakistan. But we aren't going after them there are we? Not a chance! We don't want uprisings in Britain do we?

What a shower! Brown waffles on about his wretched Afghan campaign. He has about as much clue as those hopeless First World War generals. As with most British people, I have a relative laid to rest in that battlefield. Have we learnt anything?

Sub-continental circumcision row!

This is a crazy world indeed. We are fighting a war in Afghanistan, euphemistically called a campaign by the government, and we are told categorically that the enemy is a terrorist organisation hell bent on exporting its beastliness to the streets of London and other western capitals.

Unfortunately, the people we are trying to help by extending democracy and civilisation as we know it do not know who the enemy is. Much debate is currently taking place on Pakistani internet forums about who is exactly who in terrorist circles. It has been "documented" that some Taliban fighters were not Muslims but Indians or other such. Uncircumcised males have been spotted in the numbers of corpses. So that concludes the Indians are up to their tricks. But hold on a minute, some people, like the Times of India are keen to point out this is not proof at all. "Pak blame fails Waziristan circumcision test!" trumpets this article. I like the term "Pak". Try using that in the Times of London! Many Waziris are so poor they can't afford to travel to a hospital or get a barber (ouch!) to do the operation for their boys.

So we don't really know who is who unless we get these Taliban types to drop their trousers! Maybe this is what General Stanley McChrystal should be doing if he wants to succeed in turning away from a "likely result in failure"?

http://www.pakdef.info/forum/showthread.php?t=9570&page=77

http://forum.pakistanidefence.com/index.php?showtopic=83146

More terror plots likely

The New York Times is in a quandary. They are trying to answer this question - "Does the United States need a large and growing ground force in Afghanistan to prevent another major terrorist attack on American soil?" - and they don't seem any nearer the answer.

The trouble is that the powers-that-be have completely muddled up the Taliban with al-Queda. It is rather like linking Hitler's Lebensraum with Mussolini's prancing fascism. Mussolini was only tenously linked to the Nazi war effort. The British described the Italians as being "co-belligerents" as if they could be conveniently unhitched from Hitler's bandwagon without too much trouble. "Let the Eyeties sort it out after the war" seemed to be the slapdash approach.

Similarly the Muslim fighting forces that are the Taliban and al Queda have very different agendas. If I live to be 1000 I doubt very much if I will be bothered by a Taliban bomber in Solihull. al-Queda is another matter. But they are not in Afghanistan, but in that terrorist haven that is Pakistan. Trouble is that Pakistan is a former British colony and loads of Pakistanis live in Britain. Whereas the Afghan Taliban gets shot at for causing an anti-democratic regime to have been created (and for wanting it back!), the Pakistani al-Queda groups just get a wigging from half-hearted Pakistani generals (always with one eye open for a possible coup in Islamabad).

It would be totally inappropriate to invade Pakistan and root out the real terrorists, wouldn't it? Expensive trials that have convicted demonic would-be bombers have proved the point. Not one Afghan has been lifted by the Metropolitan police for being a terrorist in action.

So what are we doing in Afghanistan? It appears we are hopelessly inadequate when it comes to checking up on the democratic process. Ballot stuffing under our noses! We are woefuly inadequate in destroying the poppy crops, so the cocaine trade carries on as usual and we have not found a single al-Queda terrorist in Kabul or the whole of Afghanistan. The Taliban may be a cruel and crazed mob, but they are just that and keep to the hills. It is the terrorists in Pakistan, linked to the "home-grown" bomb plotters that we have to be concerned with.

So maybe the answer to the question that the New York Times poses is this. Look for the terrorists in Pakistan and not Afghanistan. Tell the Pakistani government they've got a month to clean up or they face a desert storm. That's the real answer. However, I suspect this present cloud-cuckooland battle will continue and we will all be the worse for it.

Joe Biden's not really sure, is he?

Joe Biden's been chatting to the BBC. His take on the war in Afghanistan is that it is in the interests of the US and the UK. "It is worth the effort we are making," he said, warning that the terror groups on the border with Pakistan could "wreak havoc" on Europe and the US. He reiterated the Obama administration's rationale for the conflict. "This is the place from which the attacks of 9/11 and all those attacks in Europe that came from al-Qaeda have flowed from that place - between Afghanistan and Pakistan." So we should be in Pakistan too, then, clearing out the caves and cosy hiding places there? I doubt it.

This is a war without a clear purpose. On Mondays it's about democracy in Kabul. Tuesdays it's about fighting the Taliban. Wednesday it's back to the terrorist agenda of al-Qaeda. Biden says the terror groups who shelter along the Afghan-Pakistan border combine with the country's role in the international drug trade - supplying 90% of the world's heroin - means the war in Afghanistan needs to succeed. So are we trying to suppress and eradicate the drugs trade, fight terrorism or put democracy in place? Or do all three at once?

I would think such incoherent thinking is just fuel to the average Afghan cave-dweller. These guys have been living rough since they started to walk upright. Their only respect for modernity is mobile phones and designer specs. Taking pot shots at the beggars isn't going to change the mindset much.

If it was down to me, I'd hire a fleet of planes to spray the poppy crops, I'd give ten minutes warning that exocet missiles were coming at those caves, I'd put extreme pressure on the Pakistani, Somali and other governments to shape up, and I'd chuck out the bearded wonders wandering the streets of London and other cities as undesirable aliens.

But it isn't down to me!

Browned off with it all!

Well who do we believe? Malloch Brown or Bollock Brown? Someone's telling porkies, that's for sure! Our esteemed prime minister says, "I am satisfied that operation Panther's Claw has the resources it needs to be successful". Well, if it isn't, we know who to blame!

Lord Foulkes last man to talk about loyalty

Lord Foulkes has always been a scheming plotting Labour Man. Loyal only to Gordon Brown, keen on devolved government except for the English, and generally a man who puts party before country.

Now he has the cheek to suggest that military commanders' comments about resources "threaten to undermine our effort in Afghanistan and give succour to the enemy". He suggested to peers that General Dannatt and Sir Jock Stirrup should be reminded of the "importance of loyalty particularly when we are engaged in a very difficult war where victory is essential for the future safety of this country".

Bollocks, Foulkes! This war is not about safety of this country. If it were, then Pakistan would be picked apart to find the Al Quaeda terrorists along with Somalia and the client states of the Arabian peninsula. We can't even put a stop to the drugs trade which keeps Afghanistan going.

Victory may be essential but it is damned difficult to achieve when vacuous politicians keep the commanders from having the right and proper equipment to do the job properly.

Ministry of Defence run by scoundrels!

My, my! What a shower we have running the MoD. For years they have been condoning the filthy state of service quarters, the lack of proper equipment for the military and the generally deplorable way soldiers are treated after discharge. It is the chiselling way in which the country is told of things in general that sticks in the craw.

Now we find that they are incompetent at finance as well. Maybe they are lining their own pockets, who knows. What we do know is that £155 million which was said to have been spent on radio equipment in Afghanistan could not be accounted for. Is this the tip of the iceberg?

James Arbuthnot, chairman of the defence select committee, said the MoD needed to "get a grip" on its spending. "There are real concerns, given the importance of what the armed forces are doing, and the sacrifices they are making on our behalf, that the Ministry of Defence is almost breaking apart." Nest of vipers, I say. And they have the brass neck to complain about Sir Richard Dannatt.

When will it become clear to those in government that these people cannot be trusted. We need a complete clearout so that the MoD can be staffed by honourable people, not those driven to concocting falsehoods, calumnies and economies with the truth.

Gordon Brown in army helicopter fantasy!

Gordon Brown's wonderland excursion on Wednesday at PMQs was a fantasy of the first order. Now the Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Jock Stirrup, has said the deployment of more helicopters to Afghanistan would save soldiers' lives. Brown wittered on about the exact opposite. Now he is backtracking like a boy in front of the headmaster found out for telling fibs!

David Cameron said the government must listen to military commanders. "The prime minister has been telling us all week that they have got enough helicopters and actually now we know they don't," he said. What on earth are we to make of it all?

Someone keen to keep his weasel words up to scratch is Lord Mandelson. This interview from the BBC shows why he is such a wily character.

Slow work in nobbling the Taliban's poppy crop!

I thought I'd investigate a bit more about the Taliban and the opium poppy. This is going to be a long hard slog seeing as we've got cretins running the war (politicians that is!).

Nice piece from the New York Times by James Risen. "Donald H. Rumsfeld and military leaders also played down or dismissed growing signs that drug money was being funneled to the Taliban, the Pentagon officials said." One has to wonder what use Rumsfeld was to the American people. A man who shook hands with Saddam Hussein once and really thought the war in Iraq could help his oil baron buddies!

"The eradication program is rife with corruption. Farmers know they must offer bribes to avoid having their crops destroyed, American and Afghan drug officials said. It is often only those who lack money or political connections whose fields are singled out." Is this war being waged in your name? Perhaps the British Army could march into Downing Street and remove the hapless Brown?

Here's how the slow progress at destroying the poppies is done. One man and a tractor! Sounds like a title for a BBC show.

Brown is no leader!

Gordon Brown is the last man to defend the interests of the fighting soldier. He tells the House of Commons - "The British armed forces are better equipped today than they have been at any time in 40 years but we are not complacent". Are they better equipped? Perhaps they are compared with the squaddies of 1969.

However are they properly equipped? The answer is NO!

Gordon Brown also implies that the war in Afghanistan is to prevent terrorism on the streets of London. This is nonsense and a cheap smokescreen. The Taliban, however ghastly they may be in our eyes, have no desire whatsoever to be strutting the streets of London. What the Taliban are is a group of malcontents quite capable of using the drug trade to further their fantasies.

Our war is one against Al-Qaeda (or Alkie Ada as Gordon Brown calls them). These are the terrorists, the murderers and the psycopaths. They wander freely around the Arabian penisular and drift in and out of Pakistani villages at will.

If we are going to war, let's really understand who the enemy is first. And if the Taliban is so well equipped themselves, they must be exchanging something for weapons. That something is opium. When is the spraying of the poppy fields going to start?

If we hadn't bombed German munition factories during Word War II we'd have had all manner of stuff land on us. Get rid of the poppy fields and you cut the Taliban off at the pass!

Ron Paul and a few home truths

As this is a Ron Paul supporting website (shouldn't every blog be that?) I'm showing this good expose of the "War in Afghanistan". As Dr. Paul says, the more Muslims we kill, accidently or deliberately, the more ammunition there is for Al Queda. This is a hopeless battle, made even more so by the fact that nothing is being done to get rid of the poppy harvest. Instead of bombs and bullets, how about deploying an army of cropsprayers to devastate the drugs trade? Surely that's the real enemy. Let the Afghan farmers grow natural tomatoes or something, so we can have decent fresh food in the supermarkets. I bet an Afghan farmer wouldn't flog us green tomatoes just for them to be gassed in a warehouse so they go an odd orange colour!

Anyway, I digress. Here's Ron Paul -

Jack Straw's fish out of water feeling!

Jack Straw is the kind of politician who is rendered speechless in front of unadulterated truth. With him, it causes something similar to that of a fish that has been rudely hurled onto the beach by a freak wave. No freak waves this week, but on Tuesday morning I heard Straw on the Today Programme in conversation with "a prisoner". Evan Davis asked the inmate what was generally the problem. The prisoner, a lucid and straightforward guy, said he thought his crime, drug smuggling, was caused by two factors. His greed and the ever-increasing poppy harvest in Afghanistan, giving him the ability to make money. Davis asked Straw what he thought. Time for the fish impression!

The prisoner was right. He admits to being greedy, and sort of suggests that he should be helped. We have anger management courses, sessions for smokers and drinkers, and of course drug addicts. Why not for greedy people too? Possibly if these were offered to a variety of people, we might cut crime.

My anger at the greedy finance guys who used the so-called sub-prime market to enrich themselves could be assuaged by such courses. Greed management - sounds good! These sub-prime cowboys were greedy, preying on ignorant people who were taken in by the blandishments. There is a fine dividing line between the two kinds of greed!

With regard to Afghanistan, we are fighting the wrong enemy. Tribal warlords who may or may not know where Osama Bin Laden's cave is are no great enemy to the West. Their vast poppy harvest is, and all the business emanating from it. Jack Straw has no clue how to deal with this. My cynical side suggests that tackling the problem may cause a whole raft of agencies to collapse, ending with the demise of the sniffer dogs. Who wants to be put out of well-paid employment? Keep the poppies growing, keep the soldiers dying, keep "the War on Terror" going.

Isn't there a better way? If the prisoner is so clear on this, I'd give him a period to try it out. After all, he could be better than the fish impersonator!