Afghanistan, victim of corruption in the United States.

<body> Senseless Attack on Afghans That Had no Knowledge Of 9/11 Hijackings—But DOJ Officials Did! The actual al Qaeda hijackers coordinated their scheme while residing in Europe and in the United States, and their suspicious activities were known to FBI personnel that ignored the signs. Compare the blame for enabling the easy hijackings of four airliners on 9/11 between the Taliban government in Afghanistan and the documented series of corrupt and criminal acts by key people within the government of the United States. Al Qaeda operatives were made known to FBI agents in the New York City area, starting with pre-1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, during which informants advised FBI agents the precise location of where the bombe was being fabricated and the people fabricating it. (See Defrauding America.) Repeated advance notice to FBI agents in the New York City offices by a mole inside the al Qaeda cell headed by al Qaeda's primary planner of aviation terrorist acts, Ramzi Yousef. This advance notice was not acted upon due to a scheme to protect a key FBI supervisor involved in multiple murders. These same employees of the U.S. Department of Justice were simultaneously engaged in other acts related to the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 that blew up over Lockerbie. The evidence detailed in the related books reveal such matters perpetrated by employees of the Department of Justice as: Covering up for the Syrian group that actually planted the bomb on Flight 103, for political purposes, enabling them to continue their terrorist acts against the United States. Purchasing and then planting as evidence a thumb-size bomber timing mechanism. Paying million-plus bribes to several witnesses (who later provided sworn affidavits to that effect. Threatening witnesses not to reveal the truth. Falsely charging two Libyans with the 270 murders, including al Megrahi, who was released from prison in 2009—on condition that he drops his appeal that was about to be heard, which would have included sworn affidavits from those that sold the planted evidence and those that committed perjury to obtain their multi-million reward and in one case, sanctuary in the United States in the witness protection program. Al Qaeda members were in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, other parts of Africa, and in the United States, particularly in New York and New Jersey. There was no way that the United States can deprive al Qaeda members a location—especially after the deadly invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq that have general the greatest number of people in the world's history wanting to kill Americans. It would be impossible for the United States to invade every country in which al Qaeda members exist, sacrificing U.S. military personnel, in every country where al Qaeda members were located. Forcing a democracy upon a nation of tribes in Afghanistan, an indication of the utter incompetency of U.S. politicians. The tribes are loyal or controlled to their own, including warlords, not to any central government that has little control over the tribes; most of the population is illiterate and would not have the level of intelligence needed for a democracy; and a democracy is not the form of government suitable for many cultures (not to mention the grave injustices of the democracy in the United States due to the endemic corruption and endemic cover-ups). Not yet addressed—and never will be—are the people and groups in the United States whose corrupt and criminal activities played a major role that enabled the easy success of four al Qaeda groups conducting the hijackings. They had a far greater role in the success of the hijackers. Sampling of Afghan Victims of U.S. Enablers See war pictures of the sampling of horrific brutalities inflicted upon the people of Afghanistan by the actions of U.S. military personnel under orders of corrupt U.S. politicians and those people in the United States that supported their conduct and/or supported the invasion of the country. To Americans, this is the way to win the hearts and minds of the people in countries they invade! Key People in U.S. Government Shifted Enabling Blame For 9/11 Hijacking Successes from Themselves to The People of Afghanistan and Iraq—With Deadly Worldwide Consequences After al Qaeda members operating from Europe launched their easy-to-prevent hijackings of four airliners on September 11, 2001, President George Bush and his shills in Congress approved the invasion of Afghanistan on the basis that Osama bin Laden was at that time located in the remote mountainous areas of the country. Most of the American population supported this action, and thus became guilty of a number of events, including for instance: U.S. forces killed thousands of Afghans by high-level carpet bombing was in retaliation for their Taliban leaders having allowed some al Qaeda members to settle in the remote mountainous areas, and who had no knowledge of the planned hijackings. U.S. politicians then sought to make the religious fanatical Taliban the enemy, even though they were never involved in the planned 9/11 hijackings. U.S. forces fired missiles at anyone suspected of opposing the U.S. invasion of their country, with the targets being selected by U.S. military personnel safely located in Nevada. Ten years later, President Barack Obama increased the size of the U.S. military presence, stating the U.S. could not tolerate al Qaeda having a base of operation. But al Qaeda was already located in other countries, such as Somalia and Yemen, and the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan had generated an army worldwide of people wanting to kill Americans. Paradoxically, the Afghans had even less role in enabling the al Qaeda group to hijack four airliners on 9/11 than groups far more guilty—and engaged in criminal acts—within the United States. For instance: Comparison of guilt between Afghan people or corrupt acts of certain people in the United States. Al Qaeda mole providing advance information of major terrorist attacks. FBI-DOJ 9/11 index. Enablers to the easy success of four groups of terrorists on 9/11. Additional comments on the Afghanistan quagmire. Afghanistan deadly quagmire for the American public: courtesy of their politicians and shills. U.S. politicians definition of "win" in Afghanistan. Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, Mafia, and al Qaeda. History of Aviation Disasters: 1950 to 9/11. (Amazon.com and other print and e-book format locations. Lockerbie to 9/11: Massive Fraud and Consequences. This information is being provided by former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of former government agents. Stich had lived in the Middle East, flying plane loads of Muslims to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and saw the change from a Middle East of friends toward America and a Middle East of people wanting to kill Americans. So have some of the other coalition members. Sampling of 9/11 Enablers In Key U.S. Government Positions There are other issues to conduct that enabled the hijackings and nearly 3,000 people on 9/11−and the two wars that followed. If understood, it shows the horrifying ripple or butterfly effects from seemingly far and remote corrupt acts. Some highlights are the following events: FAA. Culture and conduct of certain people in the government's aviation safety offices. It was this group that had the responsibility for ordering the known measures that would have prevented years of easily preventable airline hijackings. This culture is detailed in the book, Unfriendly Skies: 20th & 21st Centuries, with a long list of crashes their conduct made possible, along with the thousands of related deaths. Sacrificing 9/11 Victims to Protect Murderous FBI Supervisor DOJ. The culture and conduct of key people in the various divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice. Years of involvement in murders, covering up for corruption in the CIA and other government entities, retaliation against people seeking to expose corruption in government (crimes against the United States), compounded by covering up advance information on several major terrorist attacks−that subsequently did occur−including the 9/11 hijackings, in order to prevent exposure of serial murders involving a key FBI supervisor. (Details of the latter subject in the book, Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, Mafia, and al Qaeda, and History of Aviation Disasters: 1950 to 9/11.) CIA and other Intelligence agencies. Not much attention has been given to their role in enabling the 9/11 hijackings to go unaddressed. It can be assumed that the history of corrupt conduct by people in the CIA had some role in generating the hatred for the United States and not acting on addressing these matters. Details of this culture are in the books, Defrauding America and Drugging America. All of these books are authored by former federal agent Rodney Stich with the help of dozens of other insiders. Vicious Attacks on Unique Whistleblower By Lawyers, Judges, and Department of Justice Personnel Protected the Corrupt 9/11 Enablers Brief Introduction Former federal agent Rodney Stich and his coalition of other former government agents and insiders had sought to report the corrupt activities in the government's aviation safety offices related to a series of specific airline disasters, and also criminal activities in other areas of overt and covert government activities. The authority for doing this was the federal crime reporting statute and the statute that permits any citizen to seek a court order requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and halt unlawful conduct. In response to these efforts, large numbers of federal judges, Department of Justice personnel, and over 50 lawyers and law firms embarked on multiple schemes to block the reports of the high-level corruption and silence the former federal agent acting as a whistleblower to expose misconduct resulting in major harm, many deaths, and a series of catastrophic events. In the process, the group of enablers—apparently protected by a powerful source high in the federal government—inflicted great harm upon that whistleblower's persistent efforts to halt the great harm. Click here for more introductory information. The 30 years of unusual efforts by a former federal agent, Rodney Stich, who sought to expose the tragedy-related corruption by people in the FAA and Department of Justice. These attempts were blocked by constant attacks and harm upon the former federal agent. Examples of some of the attacks upon him, apparently orchestrated from within the U.S. Department of Justice: Initial use of CIA-FBI-associated lawyers and law firms to file sham legal actions knowingly blocking efforts to continue exposing the high level corruption. Over 50 lawyers and law firms involved continuously from 1982 to 2005. At the initial local level, this involved complicity of about a dozen California judges. Involvement in cover-ups, obstruction of justice, and retaliation, by federal judges, from 1980 to 2005. Stich filed papers in the federal courts to report the ongoing corruption constituting federal crimes, as specifically required to be reported−and received by federal judges−under the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 USC § 4. To block Stich and his coalition of other government agents and insiders from reporting the crimes against the United States, federal judges issued a series of unlawful and unconstitutional orders permanently barring the former federal agent from even filing any papers in any federal district or appellate court. In this way, federal judges blocked the reporting of federal crimes that continued the sometimes fatal consequences, and continued in effect the misconduct that would enable the 9/11 hijackers to carry out their deadly schemes. The injunctions also blocked Stich from exercising federal defenses against the unlawful and unconstitutional actions of the hoard of lawyers. When Stich learned from his many CIA and other sources additional areas of corruption subverting national security, he again attempted to comply with the federal crime reporting statute. He filed a federal action to report these matters. In response, federal judges and federal prosecutors, acting in unison, charged Stich with criminal contempt of court−based upon the prior unlawful and unconstitutional order barring him access to federal court, and which was intended to block the reporting of federal crimes involving key federal personnel. Federal judges and federal prosecutor David Levi (now a federal judge at Sacramento), denied him a jury trial. The people involved in obstruction of justice crimes then held Stich guilty, and sentenced him, at 67 years of age, to federal prison for six months. To insure that he could not continue his exposure actions upon release, federal judges and Department of Justice personnel corruptly, unlawfully, and unconstitutionally, seized and liquidated the $10 million in assets that Stich used to fund his exposure activities. Unlawful and unconstitutional orders were rendered barring Stich from filing objections to the seizure. When he did file an objection, the filing was unlawfully unfiled and Stich was again charged with criminal contempt of court. Members of Congress and the media were informed of these criminal acts throughout the period, and chose to cover up. Massive Afghanistan Corruption Made Possible by U.S. Gullibility and Fed By U.S. Taxpayers' Borrowed Money The gullibility of U.S. personnel involved in the Afghanistan invasion provided gold mine for even the crudest form of financial corruption in Afghanistan. Numerous media reports described this looting, like taking millions from gullible U.S. personnel: U.S. Simultaneous Funding of Trucking, Security, Taliban, Warlords, and Al Qaeda "U.S. House Cites Afghan 'Protection Racket.'" Congressional Investigation Finds Trucking Contracts Fuel Extortion and Corruption; No Control Over Subcontractors. (Wall Street Journal report, June 22, 2010). Pentagon contracts for truck transportation and security along its supply chain in Afghanistan have spawned a thriving "protection racket" that is lining the pockets of local warlords and undermining the central government's authority at the cost of U.S. taxpayers, according to a congressional probe. "The HNT contract fuels warlordism, extortion and corruption, and it may be a significant source of funding for insurgents," according to a draft of the committee report reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. "In other words, the logistics contract has an outsized strategic impact on U.S. objectives in Afghanistan. Transporting supplies and materiel across such hostile terrain requires extraordinary levels of security. A typical convoy of supply trucks going from the Bagram air base outside Kabul to Kandahar in the south, for instance, will travel with up to 500 guards in dozens of trucks armed with heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. The report singles out an Afghan warlord called Commander Ruhullah—known to locals as "The Butcher" for his violent tactics—as "the single largest security provider for the U.S. supply chain in Afghanistan." Critics have said powerful local militias such as Commander Ruhullah's have flourished by rebranding themselves as private security companies. Watan Risk Management officials told House investigators the company pays between $1,000 and "$10,000 a month to nearly every Afghan governor, police chief and local military commander whose territory the company traverses. U.S. Funding of Pakistan As Pakistan Coordinates Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Military "Report Says Pakistan Intelligence Agency Exerts Great Sway on Afghan Taliban, (New York Times, June 14, 2010) Pakistan's main intelligence agency continues to provide financing, training and sanctuary to Afghan Taliban insurgents and exerts a far greater influence on Taliban strategy than previously thought, according to a report prepared by the London School of Economics. Drawing on interviews with Afghan Taliban commanders and former Taliban ministers and officials, the report suggest that Pakistan's premier intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI, supports the Taliban insurgency as a matter of official policy to contain the influence in Afghanistan of its rival India. Both serving and retired officials from the Pakistani intelligence agency are carrying out that policy, the report says. "This is not a big surprise. This is consistent with 15 years of history," Bruce Riedel, a former C.I.A. analyst and now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said. "Life has not changed. The Taliban and the ISI have a very intimate relationship." Pakistan has had closed relations with the Afghan Taliban since the group's formation in 1994, but Pakistani involvement with the insurgency against the international coalition in Afghanistan since 2001 has been both high-level and coercive, the author of the report, Matt Waldman, contends. Mr. Waldman is a fellow at Harvard University who worked in Afghanistan previously for the humanitarian organization Oxfam. "Without a change in Pakistani behavior, it will be difficult if not impossible for international forces and the Afghan government to make progress against the insurgency,"? he wrote. The report says several Taliban commanders received training in large madrasa complexes in Pakistan from Pakistani military and ISI agents. The ISI had a role in the genesis after 2001 of the insurgent group headed by Jalaluddin Haqqani and his sons that has mounted some of the most damaging attacks in Kabul, according to the report. Among the Taliban commanders interviewed was one senior Haqqani commander of 1,000 fighters who also described the significant influence of the ISI over the group. "Pakistan appears to be playing a double game of astonishing magnitude," Mr. Waldman concludes. "You can believe all of that is happening," one NATO official said in an interviews. U.S. Funding of Guards Funds Taliban and Al Qaeda "Convoy Guards Suspected of Colluding With Taliban in Afghanistan" (New York Times, June 7, 2010). The officials suspected that at least some of these security companies--many of which have ties to top Afghan officials—are using American money to bribe the Taliban. The officials suspect that the security companies may also engage in fake fighting to increase the sense of risk on the roads, and that they may sometimes stage attacks against competitors. "We're funding both sides of the war," a NATO official in Kabul said. He believed millions of dollars were making their way to the Taliban. Firms Tied to Officials The investigation is complicated, among other things, by the fact that some of the private security companies are owned by relatives of President Hamid Karzai and other senior Afghan officials. Mr. Popal, for instance, is a cousin of Mr. Karzai, and Western officials say that Watan Risk Management's largest shareholder is Mr. Karzai's brother Qayum. The principal goal of the American-led campaign here is to prepare an Afghan state and army to fight the Taliban themselves. The possibility of collusion between the Taliban and Afghan officials suggest that, rather than fighting each other, the two Afghan sides may often cooperate under the noses of their wealthy benefactors. "People think the insurgency and the government are separate, and that is just not always the case," another NATO official in Kabul said. "What we are finding is that they are often bound up together." The trucking companies hire one of the security companies that have sprung up to capture the extraordinarily lucrative market in escorting convoys. While the practice of buying off the enemy may seem extraordinary, it is neither unusual here nor unprecedented. Many Afghans, even those in the government, have relatives, and even brothers and sons, in the Taliban. U.S. Funding of Pakistan ISI That Coordinates Attacks Against U.S. Military "Report links Pakistan, Taliban" (Associated Press, June 14, 2010) "Interaction Among Terror Groups Posses New Threats" (Associated Press, July 6, 2010) (The "new" threat was known for years.] U.S. official boasts that al-Qaida has never been weaker, its upper ranks decimated because of the stepped-up drone attacks in Pakistan and special operations raids in Afghanistan. [Similar to Vietnam lies.] At the same time, they warn, in seeming contradiction: An even greater number of well-trained terrorists are setting their sights on the United States. Across the remote tribal lands between Afghanistan and Pakistan where terror groups hide, U.S. officials say they've seen a fusion of al-Qaida and others targeted by U.S. forces, including the Haqqani group and the Pakistani Taliban, who formerly focused only on their local areas. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the groups have become a "synergy of terrorist groups" with an expanding desire to kill Americans,." He was speaking last week at the Aspen Institute security forum in Colorado. AT the same forum, National Counterterrorism Center Director Michael Leiter warned that the "troubling alignment" extends all the way to Yemen and Africa. The dispersed network is making terror plots harder to spot and prevent, he said. [So much for President Obama's line to deprive terrorists a base from which to operate!] These groups have co-operated for years, even pre-dating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said New America Foundation's Peter Bergen, cautioning against describing that as a new development. But the difference now, U.S. officials contend, is that the local groups are sharing manpower, weaponry and ideology with al-Qaida. The Haqqanis, estimated by a senior defense official to be between 2,000 and 5,000 strong, have already supported attacks on U.S. targets within Afghanistan, including an al-Qaida and the Taliban suicide bombing that killed seven CIA operatives in Khost, in the suicide bombing last December. The press in Pakistan has claimed that thousands of innocents have been killed by U.S. drone strikes. U.S. Military Actions Fueling More Terrorist Attacks A Financial Times Article (June 14, 2010) US plans to turn the course of the Afghan war with a large-scale operation to secure Kandahar risk driving more people into the arms of the insurgents, a senior United Nations official has warned. Richard Barrett, who heads a UN team tracking the Taliban and al-Qaeda, also said it was nonsense to suggest the war in Afghanistan was protecting Britain from Terrorism. [The same applies to the United States, where the invasion put the United States at greater risk.) Mr. Barrett warned that deploying more troops risked sparking more conflict in previously calm areas. "Putting more troops in is in danger of making things worse ... If you push troops into these areas, then clearly they are no longer going to be quiet," he said. "This idea that they can clear up Kandahar, take control of Kandahar, and that would really weaken the Taliban, I think it's mistaken. Mr. Barrett said Afghanistan's western allies lacked a coherent approach for ending the conflict. "I don't think western states [politicians] have a clear policy; they don't know, they just don't know, what to do," he said. Mr. Barrette, who formerly headed counter-terrorism for the Secret Intelligence Service, dismissed the argument advanced by British ministers that the presence of 9,500 British troops in Afghanistan would reduce the threat to the UK. "That's complete rubbish. I've never heard such nonsense," he said, warning that the presence of foreign troops risked inflaming anti-western sentiment among British Muslim communities. Billions of U.S. Dollars Flown Out of Afghanistan A June 25, 2010 Wall Street Journal article reported billions of dollars flown out of Afghanistan: Corruption Suspected in Airlift of Billions in Cash From Kabul. KABUL—More than $3 billion in cash has been openly flown out of Kabul International Airport in the past three years, a sum so large that U.S. investigators believe top Afghan officials and their associates are sending billions of diverted U.S. aid and logistics dollars and drug money to financial safe havens abroad. The cash—packed into suitcases, piled onto pallets and loaded into airplanes—is declared and legal to move. But U.S. and Afghan officials say they are targeting the flows in major anticorruption and drug trafficking investigations because of their size relative to Afghanistan's small economy and the murkiness of their origins. Excerpts from another Wall Street Journal article (June 28, 2010), titled, "Corruption Suspected in Airlift of Billions in Cash From Kabul," stated: KABUL—More than $3 billion in cash has been openly flown out of Kabul International Airport in the past three years, a sum so large that U.S. investigators believe top Afghan officials and their associates are sending billions of diverted U.S. aid and logistics dollars and drug money to financial safe havens abroad. The officials believe [people] who have sent millions of dollars of their money abroad include high-ranking officials and their associates in President Hamid Karzai's administration, including Vice President Mohammed Fahim, and one of the president's brothers, Mahmood Karzai. Restoring the credibility of the Afghan government is a central tenet in the American counter-insurgency strategy. Combating corruption [that had existed for centuries] by the government is now as important a priority as actually fighting insurgents. This carries significant risks: many of those believed by U.S. officials to be involved in shipping money out of the country are key Afghan power brokers who are important allies in the fight against the Taliban. Over the past year, U.S. and other Western officials have grown alarmed by the ways in which corruption was fueling support tor the Taliban and indications that the massive infusions of poorly monitored Western dollars were helping foster a culture of graft. [In addition}, hundreds of millions of undeclared dollars, maybe billions, are being carried across Afghanistan's porous border with Iran and Pakistan, where a number of hawalas [money exchangers] have branches. Investigative reports two years earlier described the doling out of pallets stacked with $100 bill being given to Afghans and Iraqis without any records being kept. Meanwhile, in the United States, people, families, were living under bridges and millions were without any income. Incompetence at every level in the U.S. government and starting of two senseless wars that contradicted everything stated by U.S. politicians. A normal person would wonder, after the deadly debacles from invading Korea and then Afghanistan, with nearly 100,000 dead Americans (110 miles of dead Americans if laid out head to toe, why the trivia-obsessed American doesn't wake up to be taken for fools and expendable cannon fodder! WikiLeaks Revealed the Usual Pattern of Lies For for Forever Gullible Americans In July 2010, the Internet site, www.wikileaks.org released thousands of pages of government documents marked confidential or secret that showed what numerous investigative reporters had stated. The official reports showed, for instance: Pattern of lying to the American public, just as occurred with the Vietnam War that killed 58,000 American military personnel and wounded some 158,000, some horribly maimed. Far higher civilian murder rate than officially reported, while U.S. politicians claimed they were winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people! The support given by Pakistani intelligence personnel, ISI, to the Taliban, including helping their attacks upon U.S. military personnel. That the Pakistan population is greatly anti-American, as is Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran. That billions of dollars given to Afghanistan for aid have been diverted and unaccounted for. Sampling of prior reports on Afghanistan corruption and the usual role of the United States as bumbling "saps." Continuation of the President George H. Bush Hoax by President Barack Obama Upon his election to the office of President, Barack Obama continued to support the war in Afghanistan that was started by his predecessor, President George W. Bush, but ordered an increase in the number of American military personnel. Simultaneously, he stated he would order troop withdrawal to start in mid-2011—signaling to the Taliban—who were never the "enemy" until President Bush ordered the invasion of Afghanistan. The announced withdrawal date signaled to everyone opposing the Taliban that the Taliban would soon be again in control of Afghanistan. Delusional Statement by President Obama For Continuing the Slaughter The need to deny al Qaeda a haven in Afghanistan. Reports stated that there were less than a hundred al Qaeda in Afghanistan (versus 130,000 U.S. troops), and that most al Qaeda members were in Pakistan; and other available havens were Somalia and Yemen. So, that argument was totally invalid. The U.S. needed to first build up the Afghanistan police and military forces before U.S. troops could leave. But after a decade in Afghanistan, the facts show that: A third of Afghan police and troops deserted within a year, and usually with their weapons, which were then either sold to al Qaeda or the Taliban, or kept as they joined either groups, sometimes for higher pay. The Afghan police and troops could not be relied upon to fight. The Taliban or al Qaeda infiltrated themselves as members of the Afghan police or military force. Showing that relying upon building a reliable Afghan police or military force was as juvenile as other decisions. A June 28, 2010, Wall Street Journal article by Mr. Ajami, professor at the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, stated of the Afghan forces ability to take over--a key part of President Obama's criteria to pull U.S. forces out of Afghanistan: The "conditions on the ground" are a euphemism for the ability of the Afghan forces to assume the burden of security for their own homeland. No serious assessment holds out the promise of a capable Afghan regime and a devoted national army that would fight for the incumbent government. Afghanistan is what it is, a land driven by corruption, weighed down by illiteracy and hardened by years of betrayal and abdication. The "Afghanization" of the war is a utopian idea. President Barack Obama's Retaliatory Reaction To a General's Statement of Facts On June 23, 2010, President Obama fired Gen. Stanley McChrystal as U.S. and Nato commander in Afghanistan. That firing was in response to comments made by McChrystal to a reporter for Rolling Stone magazine that were then printed. Excerpts from President Bush's press conference statements are made here with this writer's comments on some of the remarks. Sample of articles by people courageous enough to speak the truth: Article in The Nation magazine and comments by Afghanistan expert Matthew Hoh. Catch-22 for American Public's Endless Series of Enabled Catastrophes The U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was only one in man endless series of blunders that inflict needless deaths and horribly mutilated American military personnel. No one now has the courage or the stature to make a Vietnam-like withdrawal. A withdrawal will have serious effects, but the U.S. has been pushed into a corner by its politicians and now has to face even further adverse consequences when it pulls out. The murder or deaths of thousands of Afghans arising from the lies by President George Bush (Jr.) and his shills has an endless series of blowback tragedies. And the withdrawal of the U.S. from Iraq will have its own blowback tragedies. Get use to it, since the American people either supported the deadly lies or remained silent. Comments on U.S. Staying in Afghanistan America's war in Afghanistan is unwinnable. The term, "winning," as used by U.S. politicians and pundits, has been vaguely referred to as: Creating a democracy. A non-homogeneous country of mostly illiterate members of ethnic groups and tribes, religious fanatics, in a land in which corruption is the standard culture, cannot produce a democracy. There is not the ethnic coherence. Afghans are an unruly mix of Pashtuns, Uzbeks, Hazaras, Tajiks, and Aimaks, Turkmen, among others. The Taliban are mostly Sunni and ethnic Pashtuns. Most of the population of Afghanistan belong to the same ethnic group as the Taliban. Recognize—finally—that Afghanistan is a primitive country with primitive values, and with no chance for the type of government that America's dreamers seek to force upon the mostly illiterate people. Establishing an Afghanistan army and police force. Those attempts have been met with repeated failures. Another argument is that the United States train and arms huge numbers of Afghans to fight other Afghans. The early attempts to do this resulted in the newly armed Afghans turning their weapons over to the Taliban. The Afghan army and police force that U.S. dreamers recognize as being necessary cannot be achieved, as shown by the record of personnel disappearance; disappearance with weapons sold or given to the Taliban; massive illiteracy; unwillingness to fight; abandonment of posts; refusal to engage the "enemy;" and other problems. Denying al Qaeda a base of operations. Among the arguments for continuing the eight-years of war in Afghanistan is that it is a war of necessity to prevent al Qaeda a base of operations. But al Qaeda can operate from others countries, such as Yemen. Also, there are so many people wanting to kill Americans, due to the actions of U.S. politicians, that they don't need an central base of operations. Taliban were part of the 9/11 plot and had to be punished. It was not Afghans that attacked the United States; it was Arabs from other countries, some of which had temporally used the remote and uncontrolled area of Afghanistan for training. It was al Qaeda that attacked the United States, and they were Arabs, temporarily located in the remote uncontrolled areas of Afghanistan. The Taliban probably had no knowledge of the planned 9/11 attacks. Further evidence cited in the books, Crimes of the FBI-DOJ, Mafia, and al Qaeda; History of Aviation Disasters: 1950 to 9/11; and Lockerbie to 9/11: and Massive Fraud and Consequences, reveals the corruption of key people in the United States that made it child's play for the terrorists to hijack four airliners on 9/11 and kill nearly 3,000 people. For those willing to exert some mental effort, the same people that are now protecting the United States made the 9/11 and other catastrophic events possible. U.S. politicians' version of winning the hearts and minds of the people: The repeated killing of innocent Afghans, mostly women and children, by American military forces, has eliminated any chance of the United States winning the hearts and minds of the Afghans. In the face of this obvious fact, U.S. politicians and leaders repeatedly described U.S. actions as winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. In 2011, the US war in Afghanistan had lasted longer than the combination of U.S. involvement in World War I and World War II, with no end in sight. And Taliban forces are gaining control over more parts of Afghanistan. Any part of Afghanistan that becomes controlled by U.S. forces after heavy causalities would have to permanently be controlled, resulting in continued American casualties, and costs which the United States does not have. United States troops are seen as invaders, and increasing their numbers would increase the hostility of the Afghan government. We then killed thousands of innocent Afghans with courageous high-altitude carpet bombings, drove-controlled firing platforms killing groups of innocent women and children to kill a suspected Taliban or al Qaeda operative. While most Afghans fear the Taliban, they admire the Taliban's honesty and religious piety, while abhorring the corruption of Afghan officials. There is no money to continue to fight the Taliban; China and other countries are lending money to the U.S. to engage in reckless and bloody wars—and presenting subsequent generations of Americans with the bills that will adversely effect the quality of their live—and poverty for many. Possibly the Most Practicable Policy At This Stage Admit defeat and attempt to: Broker a deal with the Taliban personnel, thereby subjecting the people to the religious fanatics that came to power when the United States abandoned the country previously. Attempt to have Afghan warlords defeat the Taliban by paying the warlords and furnishing the weapons. Be forced to accept the brutality that comes with the approach. Under the warlords, opium production will continue, and America's drug users will not be inconvenienced by a shortage of their pacifiers. Blame those people fulfilling the demand, not the drug users creating the demand! There won't be a democracy, but some semblance of control would occur, just as Saddam Hussein managed to bring about from groups fighting each other. Finally, recognize that the American public was again taken, one of many other times, and will continue to be taken! Finally, show courage and address why the U.S. has been the subject of attacks and the desire by people all over the world to kill Americans. Another Hoax Upon Naive Americans: Winning in Afghanistan What defines "winning?" There is no such thing as "winning" in Afghanistan. The United States cannot wipe out the Taliban. The U.S. cannot convert a totally corrupt society into a law abiding group. After a decade of fighting in Afghanistan, the only segment of the country that is even remotely free−occasionally− from open warfare are Kabul and Kandahar. The remainder of the country is controlled by the Taliban and brutal warlords. The government's control, what could be called "control," exists almost solely in Kabul and Kandahar. The Taliban control most of the remainder of the country. There is now a great hatred for Americans. It may seem strange to many Americans America is not winning the hearts and minds of Afghans by killing entire families through carpet bombings from high altitude, or missile attacks, hoping to kill a suspected Taliban. The Soviet Union, which had a relatively shortly supply line to Afghanistan, failed and had to retreat, just as other countries had tried and failed. The United States, with over 7,000 miles distance, has a much tougher task, which is compounded by the availability of supply routes into Afghanistan. U.S. politicians misled the people into starting the invasion of Korea that cost 38,000 American lives and thousands more wounded or maimed. The political lies that had the United States invade Vietnam cost 58,000 GI lives and countless more wounded and maimed. And what for? The politicians, and the military-industrial complex, held that the people in those countries should not be allowed to have a communist form of government. So, now who has provided the United States with money to remain "solvent?" Mostly communist countries. Here are the probable scenarios that Americans will probably experience: Heavy loss of life among American military personnel, all lost in vain, just as the lives in Korea and Vietnam were lost in vain, and afflicted with corruption inside the government of the United States inflicted upon a gullible segment of the American public. Eventually, the United States will be forced to flee the country, as it did in Vietnam, and after suffering a huge death and maiming toll, and inflicting a great debt upon the American taxpayers. And if China and other communist countries pull their money out of the United States, a financial depression worst then in the 1930s can be expected to occur. Most Americans will suffer incredible personal and financial problems beyond their comprehension. This writer lived through the great financial depression of the 1930s, and next will be much worst, with rioting and worse. The possibility also exists that if the government in Pakistan fails and is replaced by someone that hates the Americans, as most Pakistanis do, all American troops could face a Dunkirk-type of extermination. Most politicians would suffer greater if they ordered all Americans from Afghanistan. That will only be done when the causalities and continued losses are no longer sustainable−as happened in Vietnam. Only when the loss of life is no longer tolerable, and there isn't anyone willing to lend money to the United States to continue the war, will White House politicians face the urgent need to retreat. That means abandoning billions of dollars of military equipment. The longer that Americans stay in Afghanistan, the greater the growth of people hating Americans and wanting to kill them. Americans, for generations will be saddled with something unknown to most of them: the consequences of heavy debts and associated great personal and financial harm to most Americans. The American public is being deceived by U.S. politicians and their shills in the media and political pundits, just as they was deceived in Vietnam about the progress toward winning. By remaining illiterate about these problems openly described in related books, and by being too lazy or cowardly to act when they do know about it, Americans have brought this mess upon themselves. This writer is somewhat of a veteran who lived and worked in the Middle East as an airline pilot flying Muslim pilgrims from throughout the region to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, as it relates to America's involvement in Afghanistan. He loves the United States but hates what is being done to it by a literal Trojan Horse subversive force throughout the government. Awesome Blowback from CIA Meddling: Textbook Example of Far-Removed Ripple Effects Many years ago in earlier editions of Defrauding America, one of former federal agent Rodney Stich's key CIA sources, Günter Russbacher, described his many years in Afghanistan, prior, during, and after the Soviet presence. During one of dozens of conversations, Russbacher told Stich about how it was the CIA's attempt to overthrow the Afghan he stated something that caused me to question the CIA's role in that country prior to the arrival of Soviet forces. Russbacher described the role of the CIA while he was in Afghanistan, in undermining the Afghan government leader who was trying to westernize and advance the nation into the 20th Century. Those actions alienated the religious fanatics, who then conducted an insurrection to overthrow the government. Russbacher described to me how he and other CIA personnel were in Afghanistan about a year before the Soviet military entered and that the CIA was helping to undermine the government because it was pro-Soviet. During one question and answer session (September 16, 2002) Russbacher provided the following information in response to my questions: Stich: Was the CIA furnishing funds, arms, and training to people in Afghanistan seeking to overthrow the king of Afghanistan? GR: Yes they were. The guy that was running the operation, as far as arms shipments and things like that, was Stan Barker (sp). Stich: He was CIA, I presume. GR: No, he was DIA. [Defense Intelligence Agency] Stich: Do you know how long this was going on before the Soviet military went into Afghanistan? GR: About 36 months. Stich: Apparently the CIA was unhappy about the King having ties to the Soviet Union? GR: Precisely. They were backing one or two factions trying to take over the country. Brief History of Afghanistan From 1980 to 1989, the Soviet Union had its military in Afghanistan, asked in by Afghanistan’s leader to stabilize the country. One of the main reasons why the country needed to be stabilized, and why its leader asked for Soviet help, was the destabilization by the United States through the CIA. In the 1970s, Afghanistan, headed by King Muhammad Zahir Shah, was receiving aid from the United States and the Soviet Union. In July 1973, a group of military officers deposed the King and proclaimed Afghanistan a Republic. The cousin to the deposed King, Lt. Gen. Sardar Muhammad Daud Khan, became president and prime minister. He was later deposed by a group led by Noor Mohammed Taraki, who instituted Marxist reforms, aligning the country more closely with the Soviet Union. Afghanistan’s leaders attempted to modernize the country with financial help from the Soviet Union. This modernization angered a religious group, popularly called mujahidin (“Islamic warriors”), and with funds and weapons provided by the United States through CIA assets, threatened to overthrow the government. At that point, the Soviet Union was asked to send troops to Afghanistan seeking to defend against the CIA-supported insurrection. Afghanistan was devastated by the CIA-funded war that continued from 1979 to 1989, at which time the Soviets withdrew their troops. The government, now without sufficient military forces and funds to defend against the U.S. supported rebels, was overthrow in 1992. Rebel leader, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, launched military attacks on the new government, causing other members of the coalition to form their own guerrilla groups, each controlling different zones. In 1994, a group of Pashtun Islamic fundamentalist students, calling themselves the Taliban, started to take over different zones, and by September had captured Kabul and declared themselves the legitimate government of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. They then imposed a brutal puritanical form of Islamic law in sections of the country they controlled. In August 1998, as the Taliban appeared on the verge of taking over the whole country, U.S. missiles destroyed what was described by the Pentagon as an extensive terrorist training complex near Kabul run by Osama bin Laden. He was charged with bombing the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The United Nations brought about a peace agreement in March between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance, under Ahmed Shah Massoud. That agreement collapsed in July and fighting again broke out. In September, a suicide bomb attack by assassins posing as Arab journalists killed Massoud. Complicity of the American Public That Supported the Invasion or Voted for President Bush's Second Term The American public has been victimized for decades by the culture endemic in the United States. they are routinely dumbed down by media people, kept uninformed, and blissfully happy with all forms of trivia, while a literal Trojan horse form of corruption is destroying what was once a great country with a high living standard. Duped in decades of housing and financial frauds, including the latest, and victimized in countless other ways, the unread, uninformed, and easily manipulated American public continues to be blissfully unconcerned, being taken repeatedly for gullible people! Examples in related books. The most pathetic are those who voted for President's George W. Bush's second term, especially those who lost loved ones in Afghanistan or Iraq and who voted for Bush the first time, or worse, the second time. Their vote brought, or kept in office, the president whose serial lying enabled the death of their loved one. Some Other Thoughts The 9/11 hijackers were not from Afghanistan residing in European locations and in the United States. By the government's own admission, there are less than 100 al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, and they are mostly low level personnel. Most of the al Qaeda operatives and leaders are in Pakistan. In December 2009, there were about 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, with 30,000 to be sent by mid-2010. Against 100 al Qaeda operatives! The war now is against the Taliban, called insurgents for defending against the invading U.S. forces. The Taliban, consisting of mostly the Pashtun tribe, constitute the majority of the Afghan population. This radio Sunni Islamic group took over Afghanistan from 1996 until late 2001, at which time they were removed from power by the U.S., NATO, and warlord forces in an operation euphemistically called Operation Enduring Freedom. They then regrouped in 2004 when the Bush administration started the war against Iraq. Refusal to address the hostile, subversive and other misconduct conducted by U.S. politicians and the CIA that is responsible for the worldwide hatred for Americans. History of inept reasoning by U.S. politicians. Such as: Fallacy of argument that U.S. forces will leave when Afghan Army is built up and ready. Illiterate personnel being counted upon to fight fellow Afghans. History of Afghan Army personnel disappearing shortly after being issued artillery weapons. Wishful thinking, expecting illiterate personnel to fight for a corrupt central government that has never been recognized for decades by the Afghan people. The last major recognized government was that one, in the 1970s, that sought to westernize the country, and was destabilized by covert CIA arming of the radical religious fanatics. Fallacy of argument that U.S. is in Afghanistan to deprive al Qaeda of country from which to launch attacks against the United States. Al Qaeda has operatives in many other countries, including Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, plus fringe groups throughout the world Stabilizing Afghanistan. The country has been destabilized for centuries, and now with U.S. forces in the country, seen as invaders, the insurgency can only increase. The lunacy argument of U.S. conduct winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people: Carpet bombing from high altitude, killing thousands. Military personnel−and U.S. mercenaries−firing missiles from drones into crowds of people so as to kill one suspected insurgent. "Uplifting conduct" by U.S. guards at the American Embassy in Afghanistan, AmorGroup, engaging in sex parties, fondling each other, and urinating upon each other. Mercenaries for the United States randomly killing people, entire families, and never paying for their crimes. President Barack Obama stated his decision in November 2009 to send more U.S. troops into Afghanistan was based upon the need to deny al Qaeda members a base. But al Qaeda is openly located in Yemen and Somalia, with members in other countries. That establishes the rationale for sending U.S. troops into Afghanistan totally without merit. Further, the argument given to have any U.S. troops in Afghanistan is to train the Afghan Army. But it has been shown time and again that the Afghans recruited for the Afghan Army are totally unreliable. The U.S. is in a Catch-22 no-win and positive loss situation. Again! Some thoughts on Afghanistan from Boris Korczak, a former CIA/KGB double agent," and friend of this writer, who infiltrated the KGB on behalf of the CIA. During the period from 1979 to 1989, while the Soviets were in Afghanistan, the United States trained and armed people who are now called al Qaeda and the insurgents. Among the architects of this policy was the CIA's Robert Gates, now secretary of defense. The Afghan leader at that time requested Soviet assistance to defend against religious rebels secretly armed by the United States. (Details in the book, Defrauding America.) Documentary Books Showing Corruption Among U.S. Leaders and Resulting Tragedies All of the books are available at amazon.com, in print and on the Kindle, and at many other Internet sites. They bring together the various pieces of the puzzle to better understand the overall picture, and why the same conditions continue year after year. Information on the books by former government agent Rodney Stich Sampling of early books reviews Sampling of complimentary letters/faxes to author/activist Rodney Stich. More information about these books by clicking here. www.defraudingamerica.com www.unfriendlyskies.com www.druggingamerica.com www.defraudingamericablog.com </body>