Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Don't Be Fooled by the Taliban Hysteria in Pakistan: They Aren't Going to Take Over

By Pepe Escobar, Asia Times. Posted May 1, 2009.


The fear being stoked of Taliban taking over nuclear-armed Pakistan are a ruse to legitimize Obama's expanding Af-Pak war.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Apocalypse Now. Run for cover. The turbans are coming. This is the state of Pakistan today, according to the current hysteria disseminated by the Barack Obama administration and United States corporate media - from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to The New York Times. Even British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said on the record that Pakistani Talibanistan is a threat to the security of Britain.

But unlike St Petersburg in 1917 or Tehran in late 1978, Islamabad won't fall tomorrow to a turban revolution.

Pakistan is not an ungovernable Somalia. The numbers tell the story. At least 55% of Pakistan's 170 million-strong population are Punjabis. There's no evidence they are about to embrace


Talibanistan; they are essentially Shi'ites, Sufis or a mix of both. Around 50 million are Sindhis - faithful followers of the late Benazir Bhutto and her husband, now President Asif Ali Zardari's centrist and overwhelmingly secular Pakistan People's Party. Talibanistan fanatics in these two provinces - amounting to 85% of Pakistan's population, with a heavy concentration of the urban middle class - are an infinitesimal minority.

The Pakistan-based Taliban - subdivided in roughly three major groups, amounting to less than 10,000 fighters with no air force, no Predator drones, no tanks and no heavily weaponized vehicles - are concentrated in the Pashtun tribal areas, in some districts of North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), and some very localized, small parts of Punjab.

To believe this rag-tag band could rout the well-equipped, very professional 550,000-strong Pakistani army, the sixth-largest military in the world, which has already met the Indian colossus in battle, is a ludicrous proposition.

Moreover, there's no evidence the Taliban, in Afghanistan or in Pakistan, have any capability to hit a target outside of "Af-Pak"(Afghanistan and Pakistan). That's mythical al-Qaeda's privileged territory. As for the nuclear hysteria of the Taliban being able to crack the Pakistani army codes for the country's nuclear arsenal (most of the Taliban, by the way, are semi-literate), even Obama, at his 100-day news conference, stressed the nuclear arsenal was safe.

Of course, there's a smatter of junior Pashtun army officers who sympathize with the Taliban - as well as significant sections of the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency. But the military institution itself is backed by none other than the American army - with which it has been closely intertwined since the 1970s. Zardari would be a fool to unleash a mass killing of Pakistani Pashtuns; on the contrary, Pashtuns can be very useful for Islamabad's own designs.

Zardari's government this week had to send in troops and the air force to deal with the Buner problem, in the Malakand district of NWFP, which shares a border with Kunar province in Afghanistan and thus is relatively close to US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops. They are fighting less than 500 members of the Tehrik-e Taliban-e Pakistan (TTP). But for the Pakistani army, the possibility of the area joining Talibanistan is a great asset - because this skyrockets Pakistani control of Pashtun southern Afghanistan, ever in accordance to the eternal "strategic depth" doctrine prevailing in Islamabad.

Bring me the head of Baitullah Mehsud
So if Islamabad is not burning tomorrow, why the hysteria? There are several reasons. To start with, what Washington - now under Obama's "Af-Pak" strategy - simply cannot stomach is real democracy and a true civilian government in Islamabad; these would be much more than a threat to "US interests" than the Taliban, whom the Bill Clinton administration was happily wining and dining in the late 1990s.

What Washington may certainly relish is yet another military coup - and sources tell Asia Times Online that former dictator General Pervez Musharraf (Busharraf as he was derisively referred to) is active behind the hysteria scene.

It's crucial to remember that every military coup in Pakistan has been conducted by the army chief of staff. So the man of the hour - and the next few hours, days and months - is discreet General Ashfaq Kiani, Benazir's former army secretary. He is very cozy with US military chief Admiral Mike Mullen, and definitely not a Taliban-hugger.

Moreover, there are canyons of the Pakistani military/security bureaucracy who would love nothing better than to extract even more US dollars from Washington to fight the Pashtun neo-Taliban that they are simultaneously arming to fight the Americans and NATO. It works. Washington is now under a counter-insurgency craze, with the Pentagon eager to teach such tactics to every Pakistani officer in sight.

What is never mentioned by US corporate media is the tremendous social problems Pakistan has to deal with because of the mess in the tribal areas. Islamabad believes that between the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and NWFP, at least 1 million people are now displaced (not to mention badly in need of food aid). FATA's population is around 3.5 million - overwhelmingly poor Pashtun peasants. And obviously war in FATA translates into insecurity and paranoia in the fabled capital of NWFP, Peshawar.

The myth of Talibanistan anyway is just a diversion, a cog in the slow-moving regional big wheel - which in itself is part of the new great game in Eurasia.

During a first stage - let's call it the branding of evil - Washington think-tanks and corporate media hammered non-stop on the "threat of al-Qaeda" to Pakistan and the US. FATA was branded as terrorist central - the most dangerous place in the world where "the terrorists" and an army of suicide bombers were trained and unleashed into Afghanistan to kill the "liberators" of US/NATO.

In the second stage, the new Obama administration accelerated the Predator "hell from above" drone war over Pashtun peasants. Now comes the stage where the soon over 100,000-strong US/NATO troops are depicted as the true liberators of the poor in Af-Pak (and not the "evil" Taliban) - an essential ploy in the new narrative to legitimize Obama's Af-Pak surge.

For all pieces to fall into place, a new uber-bogeyman is needed. And he is TTP leader Baitullah Mehsud, who, curiously, had never been hit by even a fake US drone until, in early March, he made official his allegiance to historic Taliban leader Mullah Omar, "The Shadow" himself, who is said to live undisturbed somewhere around Quetta, in Pakistani Balochistan.

Now there's a US$5 million price on Baitullah's head. The Predators have duly hit the Mehsud family's South Waziristan bases. But - curioser and curioser - not once but twice, the ISI forwarded a detailed dossier of Baitullah's location directly to its cousin, the Central Intelligence Agency. But there was no drone hit.

And maybe there won't be - especially now that a bewildered Zardari government is starting to consider that the previous uber-bogeyman, a certain Osama bin Laden, is no more than a ghost. Drones can incinerate any single Pashtun wedding in sight. But international bogeymen of mystery - Osama, Baitullah, Mullah Omar - star players in the new OCO (overseas contingency operations), formerly GWOT ("global war on terror"), of course deserve star treatment.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: obama, pakistan, taliban, af-pak

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Pepe Escobar Says It As It Is Whilst Obama Escalates War
Posted by: tony_opmoc on May 1, 2009 2:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its about time people started analysing what has been going on since even before 9/11 to work out the true agenda and where the real evil is coming from.

Hint - its us.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You're HALF RIGHT!!!! Posted by: woodford54
PAK
Posted by: vickymiss2001 on May 1, 2009 4:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IF the USA does not stop the war against Islam the ISI will give authority of Nukes to whom they think can stop the west. Especially if USA keeps attacking Pakistan's sovergnity. This article looks like a challenge. This long war can't go on for ever and the USA refused every peace proposal from Al quieda and the other islamic states. if they can't accept peace muslims are forced to fight them. Like the Battle of Badr. THis article supports obama's war against islam - which it is because it distrupts the muslim world and kills innocent muslims. Spend all USA money until bankruptcy then the USA will be governed by the muslims as they try to run from the Islamic terroritory.

Your choice. Pak government has to decide from - Letting USA attack the country and kill civilians or stopping them with the Nukes and we can guess what side the secret service would lean to. Everyone is tired of murderous America --

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: PAK Posted by: tony_opmoc
~~
Posted by: Llama11 on May 1, 2009 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kudos to Pepe, and Alternet for posting his article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's End War - Eliminate Its Source, Dissolve Islam
Posted by: iris89 on May 1, 2009 6:21 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wars should be eliminated and at present one religion is responsible for over 90% of the violence on earth as pointed out by an Australian newspaper as follows:

"Did you know that 90-95% of the conflicts in the world today are Muslims fighting non-muslims or each other? " [source - The Weekend Australian, November 26-27, 2005 AD]"

I am getting very tired of hearing Palestinians and other Ishmaelite crying crocodile tears and always trying to put the blame for what they do on others such as their conspiracy weavers tried to do about who did 9/11/2001 attack on the World Trade Center, etc. Screaming against what they call wrongful occupations when they are guilty of occupying Byzantine territory, Palestine which belongs to the Israelites [see Numbers the 34 th. Chapter in any Bible for proof of this, and their outright greed as they have over 98% of the Middle East, but still greedly want the less than 2% belonging to their sister tribe Israel] - its time we get real and put an end to this so the world can stop experiencing continuous Ishmaelite induced strife such as shooting rockets at Israel.

Solution, dissolve this false religion and rid the earth of at least 90% of the violence. But of course the politicians will not do what is needed since as Jeremiah 10:23 says, "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." (Authorized King James Bible; AV). To read detailed information, go to the following article:

[go to] When Should A Religion Be Dissolved In The Interest Of World Peace?

Which can be found at,

http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/

An Educational Referral Forum under the sub-heading, ' ISLAM THE SOURCE OF MOST VIOLENCE

Along with many other useful articles.

For more details, go to:

[1] http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/ An Educational Referral Forum

[2] http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209 A Forum Devoted to Exposing The False Religion of Islam

[3] http://jude3.proboards92.com/ A Free-Speech Forum For All

Posting the truth and reality is in no way 'hate speech' per "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

Now I challenge you to show me one error or untruth in anything I wrote. PM me on either #1 or #3 forums above, and we will discuss and I will back up with proof everything I said, so stop lying about me and what I say.

Iris89

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How bigoted Posted by: 2thepoint
What would Pakistan be now if Bhouto had lived????
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 1, 2009 6:52 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm no scholar on Pakistani politics- but it seemed Bhouto had the people behind her and she was looking to find peaceful resolutions while keeping the fanatics under control. Boy that would have hurt the War profiteers bottom line ah?
Do you thik she would have conceded the resort area of the Swat Valley? Do you thinnk she would have protected the pak/afghani Border more diligently? Would she have rallied the people to defeat extremeism within their own communities- neighbor to neighbor?
knowing what we knownow about the Bushies tryying to legitimize the invasion into Iraq for no good american Reason. Considering there is evidence of Cheney's Hit squad...It begs the question who really did assasinate Bhouto? Who had the most to gain to maintain the status quo? Who benefited from the spill over of the Taliban (AQ) into pakistan?The ever growing recruitment of 'enemy Combatants'? Follow the money, as always.
Why would the ever elusive Cheney finally become so public- demanding th erelease of memos proving the use of torture- Is he hoping WE prosecute him for that 'deateabel' crime instead of more obvious High crimes being prosecuted by foreign countries? considering our weak stomachs for harsh punishments, I betting he's praying we sentence him to life in prison, before some other less congenial country executes him for more heinous crimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nice Job Alternet
Posted by: scared on May 1, 2009 7:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This was a great article. Probably one of the best that's been on Alternet about the region.

Pakistan has a fascinating history. I recently read "The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power" by Tariq Ali. It was one of the most informative and well written books on the region I've ever read. Tremendous learning experience. I'd highly recommend reading that book if you liked this article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nice Job Alternet Posted by: Basenjis
Barack Obama administration and US corporate media
Posted by: US Citizen on May 1, 2009 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article writes of "the current hysteria disseminated by the Barack Obama administration and United States corporate media". Why are the Barrack Obama administration and the US corporate media so hell-bent on expanding this war into Pakistan? I can easily picture the George W. Bush administration needlessly expanding this war, but why Obama and Clinton? Hasn't the US spread enough needless war in recent years without stirring up Pakistan?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article is reactionary more than factual ...
Posted by: Hechicera on May 1, 2009 7:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sure, the US has caused much instability in the region, and the media loves a good fear mongering. But, that doesn't mean that Pakistan doesn't have real issues.

Follow some of the other Asia Times contributors that actually live in Pakistan like Syed Saleem Shahzad. You will get a different picture. Karachi has seen things like this: Targeted Killings.
That can't be called "stabilizing". Karachi is no where near a "Talibanized" area btw.

Or, check out editorials in Pakistani-based Dawn. And you find out that Pakistanis don't even know, but are painfully aware that if something doesn't improve that a failed state is indeed possible. Petraus fear-mongeing of "by next week"? err well no. But to ignore the possibility would be equally irresponsible as premature fear mongering.

On the nukes though, I think the Army will protect them to the end, and I hope we do think about China before we rush in and try to take Pakistani nuke sites. China runs some of the Pakistani nuclear power plants jointly with them. I can't find the link now, but China, not the US was announced as having the list of nuclear sites by Pakistan "just in case". China seems to be trying to rapidly increase domestic ties as a way of both stabilizing and gaining influence in Pakistan right now.

So forgetting China also shares a border with Pakistan would be foolish.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Other side
Posted by: chorton on May 1, 2009 9:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No time for details, but this fails to mention reports from NYTimes past 2 weeks on how for at least 5 years Taliban has been instigating and leading revolt of peasants against landlords and Islamic courts as tool for justice for poor against rich which is far beyond their reach thru court and legal system set up by Great Britain.

Very much we don't know but standard for what to listen to is now set higher. This article doesn't mention those issues. Don't take it very seriously.

Gotta run...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Taliban the Good Guys? Posted by: chorton
Taliban are a menace that we helped to create
Posted by: MeyravLevine on May 1, 2009 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Clinton recently acknowledged in her testimony to the Congress.

I have a college friend who now lives in Pakistan.

He blames the rise of Taliban on both the complicity of the Pak government with US in the Afghan-Sovite war in the 80s; and the 'strategic depth' rationale of Pak state and US/Saudi interests in having hostile Wahabi Taliban in Iran's backyard.

But most importantly, he blames the Pak state and the ruling elites (feudal lords and industrialits) failure to provide basic necessities such as a working judicial system, education, food and health-care, and jobs for the rise of Taliban.

Pakistan is a failed. Although rich in many natural resources, the ruling elites implemented policies that created a subservient middle-class, and a large serf class.

Ironically, the free-market fundamentalists in US and Europe want the same policy! We only have to look at Pakistan to see what happens when capitalists run amok.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

9/11
Posted by: tony_opmoc on May 1, 2009 11:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once you are 100% convinced.

It's like someone has kicked you exceedingly hard in the balls.

No longer can you blame some other even more Evil than the Evil in Our Own Culture.

When it comes to EVIL

And whilst I do not doubt that Evil is Rampant all Over The World

The Greatest EVIL

Comes from within My Culture

We Did It.

And I thought we were Nice

We are Not Nice.

We are EVIL

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 9/11 Posted by: Passacaglia
The Taliban, thanks to US and EU, are ruining the lives of the sweetheart civilians in Af/Pak.
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on May 1, 2009 11:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it utterly disgusting that this author would go out of his way to cover up the Taliban's abominal history of abusing women, children, and even men who wanted to be free on their own. Islam is not to blame but it is the people who abuse religion who are to blame. It is the US and even Europe who are responsible for aiding and abetting such criminal abuse. Without the US and EU butting in, the civilians would be better able to fight for their freedom and the Taliban would be unable to tyrannize the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama is making things worse, in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Posted by: Garvagh on May 1, 2009 11:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bravo! The great majority of Afghans do not want more US soldiers in their country. Does that not tell us something?

War is hugely profitable. Bigger wars are even bigger profit centers. The US is incapable of engaging in sustained military operations in a tribal Muslim country because the more pople killed, the more insurgents that jump up. Vietnam redux.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Care for another worrisome problem?
Posted by: grindermonkey on May 1, 2009 1:34 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Try this one on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU

____________

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush Would Have Been Called On This, But Obama Won't
Posted by: mikeblack on May 1, 2009 2:19 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article. It's always refreshing to finally see truth written. Even PBS's news coverage, which is usually somewhat respectable in comparison to other news broadcasts, is giving a total Chicken Little "Pakistan is falling!" spin on things. Even going the old CNN route of showing children praising the taliban in an attempt to be scary.

They're getting control of small rural areas that offer nothing. Areas where the local government probably isn't much different than the taliban anyway. Now, I'm not saying them getting any kind of power is a good thing, but the only sin Pakistan is committing in dealing with them is not falling into the Bush-like "You're either with us or against us! No concessions!" line. You know, that thing Obama ran against during his campaign but only seems to be escalating. We've got to stop the practice of being (Team America) world police where we've got to shut down every government we disagree with. These people already agree with the strict islamic rule, they're not trying to take over people with the moralistic worldview of Los Angeles residents or something. It's their culture.

If Bush wanted to escalate Afghanistan and possibly start a new war in Pakistan, people would be outraged. But people are so desperate to hang on to the myth that Obama is going to be a good president they're letting him get away with it.

If you still have faith in Obama after taking a realistic look at his foreign policy, it's the very definition of blind faith.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You hit the nail on the head. Posted by: Wayne Etheridge
Pepe is telling half of the story
Posted by: jsa9 on May 1, 2009 3:15 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well-equipped, very professional 550,000-strong Pakistani army----Im very sorry to tell you, but, this statement is for the most part false.The Army is NOT well equipped, and professional. Their arms are in need of a major upgrade. Also, close to half of the police force and the Army openly and in secret agree with the Taliban, and their law.I saw two interviews with US troops fighing on the border.Every man intervied said that the Taliban fighters were hard nosed hightly trained fierce foes.Two even said that they "respected" them for their skill.Plus Pepe sort of failed to tell you that last week The Taliban came within 60 miles of the capital city.Every city, town and village they have taken over the Taliban has closed all schools, burned all the books,kliied not only Christians, but anyone who gets in the way. They have gone back to the activity they love the most, beating women.One of the cities has almost 2 million people. With the blessing of the Goverment.When the Army finally got there they{and im serious}"asked the Taliban to please leave and go further north. What a joke.Im not saying that they are "today" looking to take over the country, but its a logical fact that they want and need another country to call their own. Also, their buddies in the caves up north in the mountains will gladly help in any way.The country is FULL of corruption and is just holding on. The billions we gave then is ALL gone. Look what we got for our money and trying to help.All im saying is that the situation is very serious--plese believe me, or read the many articles i have read. Its all there.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Convoluted mess
Posted by: willymack on May 1, 2009 3:37 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The most compelling reason for the US to get the hell out of other nations' business resides in Pakistan, Afghanistan, all the other 'stans, and the Middle East. There are ethnic hatreds, tribal and familial feuds, and political shenanigans going back hundreds if not thousands of years, and a cast of characters that'd make a Russian novel look like a nursery rhyme. There's absolutely NO hope of anyone in our diplomatic service attaining anything resembling an in-depth understanding of the dynamics there. Hell we can't even understand our OWN people,and should be paying more attention to our own problems, and minding our own business.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fairytales
Posted by: 2thepoint on May 1, 2009 5:52 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and the left said Iran would never have a nuke in the near future..

Obama better be ready to make the hard choice of taking out Pakistans nukes if/when the Taliban gets close to taking that country over or it's fun time in the mid east!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't be fooled by ANY hysteria
Posted by: Beck on May 2, 2009 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Start keeping track of how much any of it comes true. It fizzles and the fear just shifts to a new target, for the most part.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ethnic breakdown
Posted by: 876 on May 4, 2009 12:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, there's a smatter of junior Pashtun army officers who sympathize with the Taliban - as well as significant sections of the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency. But the military institution itself is backed by none other than the American army - with which it has been closely intertwined since the 1970s. Zardari would be a fool to unleash a mass killing of Pakistani Pashtuns; on the contrary, Pashtuns can be very useful for Islamabad's own designs


This statement gives an absurd impression that the Taliban would be anymore a “Pashtun” movement than a Punjabi one. It was after all the Punjabis who took Arab and American funds to train and evangelize impoverished Pashtuns to work as a Punjabi proxy army in Afghanistan. It is still Punjabis who promote the Taliban to the detriment of both Afghanistan and the Pashtun minority they attempt to keep impoverished and uneducated. Your implications is simply off and your are no more than another westerner promoting ethnic divisiveness for your own good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WeMadeAmistake
Posted by: aroleflin on May 11, 2009 7:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pascivists kill people. Learn from history as it always repeats itself. Idealism is a disease of the left. It also kills.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement