Time for a New Deal: Bin Laden, Pakistan and $20bil in US aid.

photo courtesy New York Times

The death of Osama bin Laden is a milestone in the history of our country.

One cannot underestimate the significance of his death to those men and women who have been working tirelessly for over a decade to find him.  To the families of the men and women who perished at his hand on 9/11, at our bombed embassies in Africa, aboard the USS Cole, to the families of those who have perished in the pursuit of the man behind al-Qaeda. To the generation that has grown up with the images of the collapsing towers seared into their child's eyes, the generation that has known only terrorism, threat levels, security restrictions and never peace.

President Obama and White House staff watch the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound live

It is a milestone on many levels. Yet milestones mark beginnings as they do endings.

Late Sunday night, in the short time between the news leak of bin Laden's death and President Obama's speech making it official, sources in the intelligence, military and diplomatic communities where already questioning the significance of the al-Qaeda's leader's presence in Abbottabad, amidst a community known for its current and former Pakistani high-ranking military and intelligence officials. Bin Laden's compound is eight times the size of the other homes in the neighborhood. The copiously fortified buildings are within 800 yards of the Kakul Academy, Pakistan's premier military officer training headquarters.

We have since learned that President Obama alerted Pakistani President Zardari of the operation only after our helicopters were on the ground inside the compound and the Pakistanis had scrambled fighter jets in response to the incursion.

video of the compound following the attack filmed by embedded abc news cameraman.

It is a well known fact that elements of Pakistan's military and intelligence communities (the latter being the infamous Directorate for Inter-Service Intelligence or 'ISI') have sympathized with and aided al-Qaeda. It is a relationship that goes back decades and claims many close ties.  While the Pakistani government has officially claimed the opposite and vowed privately to root out any such ties, one thing is certain: the circumstances of the events Sunday demonstrate, beyond any shadow of a doubt, the relationship between the Pakistanis with bin Laden and al Qaeda is as robust and effective as ever. (Albeit, not so much with bin Laden anymore.)

At first glance, it is curious how such cooperation has continued even as al Qeada and its unofficial partner, the Taliban, have unleashed violence against Pakistanis themselves with car-bombs, assassinations and outright gun-battles throughout the country. The Taliban even controls Pakistan's Swat Valley, a coveted region once known for its beauty and tourism. How is it then, one might ask, that, with some, they may work almost overtly as a team?

The answer is a simple one. From 2002 to 2011, the U.S. has granted Pakistan in excess of 20 billion dollars. 20 Billion dollars to be used in the war on terrorism (approx. 13bil) and as economic aid (approx. 6bil) to the government of a country not especially known for its lack of corruption. A country (i.e. the pocket stuffing, swiss-bank account leaders of the goverment, military and intelligence communities) can get accustomed, very well accustomed to such an inflow of cash. It would follow, theoretically, that if terrorism were to actually be stamped out, if bin Laden were captured, if the tide significantly turned towards peace, all those billions of tax-payer dollars wouldn't be quite the priority it is for the U.S. Government.

Or, perhaps, 'was' the priority for the U.S. Government. For as we research and write from here in quiet Cambridge, Massachusetts; we can nearly hear the cries and hurly-burly hue rising from the US Capitol in Washinton, DC. Senator Carl Levin, Chair of the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee stated in a conference call to reporters Monday:

[the Pakistanis have] got a lot of explaining to do. It's hard to imagine that the military or police did not have any ideas what was going on inside of that [compound]." 

Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker, told the Associated Press:

of his letter to Secretary of State Clinton "seeking details on the level of cooperation from Pakistan, saying the fact that bin Laden lived in comfortable surroundings near Islamabad 'calls into question whether or not the Pakistanis had knowledge that he was there and did not share that knowledge.'"

Doug Mills/The New York Times John O. Brennan, the White House counterterrorism adviser, speaking about the death of bin Laden on Monday

By later today, expect a cacophony of similar, if not more far less diplomatic, voices coming from Capitol Hill. The previously itemized 1.3bil of U.S. aid in this year's budget is pretty much dead on arrival. Again, according the Associated Press this morning:

"Congress may consider cutting the almost $1.3 billion in annual aid to Pakistan if it turns out the Islamabad government knew where Osama bin Laden was hiding, the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Tuesday.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she wants more details from CIA director Leon Panetta and others about the Pakistani government's role. Feinstein spoke to reporters about the raid that killed bin Laden early Monday and the questions raised by his hiding place deep inside Pakistan."

Agreeing with the Chairwoman, from across the aisle:

"'I think this tells us once again that, unfortunately, Pakistan at times is playing a double game,' said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a Senate Armed Services Committee member who indicated that Congress could put limits on funds for Pakistan."

One thing may be sure, we are at a critical moment with our presumed "ally in combating terror." It might be we will soon learn that is was Pakistani intelligence that helped make the historic take-down of bin Laden possible. This would be highly unlikely. With circumstances of the past 72 hours and what may be gleaned over the coming days it is more likely we will see a shift in our approach to Pakistan. With the death of bin Laden by U.S. Navy Seals on Sunday, we are more likely to see a Pakistan with far less leverage over the United States. We are also likely to see a Pakistan with far less U.S. tax-payer monies coming in the future.

After learning of the death of Osama bin Laden, angry supporters of Pakistani religious party Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam burn a flag of the United States during a rally to condemn the killing. The protest took place in Quetta, Pakistan, yesterday. - AP

While this reassessment is absolutely necessary and well-overdue, we believe it would be a dire mistake to disengage in the manner some would have us do. It continues to be the worlds most unstable nuclear-equipped country. With severe rifts between the military and and intelligence communities on one hand, and the civilian government on the other; and with the rising fundamentalism and accompanying violence matched with what will surely be a period of retribution for the U.S. killing of a hero to a small but vocal community, now is not the time to leave Pakistan to the Pakistanis. The U.S. must have a continued presence in the country and hold its leaders accountable, while helping to discourage the overthrow of the government by any number of rival groups.

To paraphrase the words of the great Chinese General and strategist, Sun-tzu, we would do well to keep our friends close and our enemies closer.


[On a related matter, The Democrat Deal, its staff and families, wish to convey our heartfelt gratitude to the brave Navy Seals who carried out this operation, the intelligence professionals who made it possible and the American men and women who have fought for this outcome for the past decade. Our thanks and blessings]

A Few Bad Men: What do Terry Jones, Fred Phelps and Osama bin Laden have in common?

Afghans carry a wounded man following an attack on the UN office during a protest against the burning of a copy of the Quran by a Florida pastor, Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan, Friday, April. 1, 2011. Photo courtesy AP

"I would hope that Pastor Terry Jones and his supporters will consider the ramifications of their planned book-burning event. It will feed the fire of caustic rhetoric and appear as nothing more than mean-spirited religious intolerance. Don't feed that fire. If your ultimate point is to prove that the Christian teachings of mercy, justice, freedom, and equality provide the foundation on which our country stands, then your tactic to prove this point is totally counter-productive." Sarah Palin, from her Facebook page prior to the event.

As a direct result of Terry Jones' well-publicized burning of the Koran on March 20th outside his church, the ironically named Dove World Outreach Center (designated as one of the 18 leading "hate groups" by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2010 for his attacks on homosexuality), riots occurred in the Muslim world. One of these riots, as pictured above, led to the deaths of at least 12 people (including 8 UN employees) and left nearly 100 injured.

Mr. Jones has the right to burn any book he wishes. It is a freedom of speech. One of the many freedoms the country has fought to protect for over the past two centuries. Yet, with rights come responsibilities, and his actions are the antithesis of responsible. He has sent teens to school with t-shirts emblazoned with the phrase "Islam is the Devil" and distributed lawn signs of the same verbiage. He has joined with the infamous Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church of the godhatesfags.com infamy for an anti-gay rally, saying last April “[h]omosexuality makes God throw up.”

Just as the invasion of Iraq following 9/11 became al-Qaeda's best recruiting tool, Mr. Jones' actions only solidify the rhetoric of the equally extreme fundamentalists in the Muslim world.

Neither the Dove World Outreach Center, the Westboro Baptist Church, al-Qaeda or the Taliban have any true connection to the faiths they invoke save for the self-serving fictions created and fanned by the likes of Jones, Phelps and bin Laden. What they do share is intolerance, hate and violence; the very opposite of the most basic theology of the world's many faiths.

The onus then falls to the rest of us to do our best to undue the damage done by the promoters of hate. To speak out against such actions as the Koran burning last month. To speak to the vastly greater bulk of similarities between faiths than the differences. To proclaim, even evangelize, and live the most shared edict, the distillation of all of our faiths: the golden rule, to treat others as we would wish to be treated. History teaches that truth, eventually, prevails as Christianity teaches "blessed are the peacemakers" and the Koran teaches that respect for the lives of all is sacred.  We ask that you, the reader, join us in putting our collective shoulder against the side of truth and the golden rule, to move it along so that's it's momentum may never know the slightest restraint as a result of the actions of a few bad men.


Below, an excellent commentary by Cathleen Falsani.

Terry Jones: Holy Hand Grenade Outreach Center
By Cathleen Falsani
courtesy Religion News Service 6 April 2011

(RNS) The website of the Dove World Outreach Center describes the tiny church in Gainesville, Fla., as “a New Testament church based on the Bible, the Word of God.”

Someone might want to tell them that they missed that whole “Blessed are the peacemakers” part.

While there is great debate about what, exactly, Jesus meant by many things he is quoted as saying in the New Testament, the “peacemakers” passage is not one of them. It is eminently clear that Jesus was talking not just about being peaceful, but also creating peace in the world.

As we’re all too painfully aware by now, the church, led by Pastor Terry Jones, put the Quran on trial on March 20 and set it aflame as punishment. That act, in turn, sparked deadly riots in Afghanistan that killed nearly two dozen people, including several United Nations peacekeepers.

To lob a religious grenade into the fragile tinderbox that is the Islamic world is the opposite of what Jesus described.

“We do not feel responsible — no,” Jones said in an interview with ABC News. “We feel more that the Muslims and radical Islam uses that as an excuse. If they didn’t use us as an excuse, they would use a different excuse.”

Whether the kind of violent response witnessed in Afghanistan over the past week was Jones’ intention or not, it is precisely what his actions have wrought.

That is not peaceable. It is wrong. It is sinful. It flies in the face of the message that the Prince of Peace brought to the world, and makes a mockery of the white dove referenced in the very name of Jones’ horribly misled church.

When Jesus said that “peacemakers” would be blessed and called the “children of God,” he wasn’t just talking about people who are peaceful or hope for peace. Jesus was talking specifically about those who “make” peace, those who work for harmony in conflict and unity in divisions.

Jones told ABC that he presided at the “International Judge the Quran Day” event and the subsequent burning to raise “awareness of this dangerous religion and this dangerous element” within Islam.

The irony that his asinine actions portrayed his own Christian faith and values as pretty dangerous themselves seems to be lost on Jones. But it’s not lost on many other Christians, Muslims and people of good faith around the globe: the British government deemed Jones such a danger that in January it barred him from entering the U.K. to protect “the public
good.”

Theologically speaking, Jones shouted “Fire!” in a crowded theater. He caused a riot. Lives were lost. And their blood is on his hands.

The deadly potential of Jones’ Quran burning was something he was well aware of before he lit the match. Jones first threatened to burn the Muslim holy book last fall on the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. President Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and a host of international political and religious leaders publicly urged Jones to abandon his plans. And for a time, he did.

But six months later, ignoring political, religious and military warnings about the clear and present danger of his plans, Jones brazenly carried them out anyway.

Although Jones shares culpability for the deaths in Afghanistan with his fellow religious extremists (in this case Muslim rather than Christian fundamentalists) whose insane rage physically took so many lives, Jones was the catalyst, the chief provoker and inciter.

While Jones claims it was within his civil and constitutional rights to burn the Quran, some legal experts, including U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, are seriously questioning whether the First Amendment should protect speech that directly incites violence at home or abroad.

In a 1919 Supreme Court decision, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously said that even the “most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic.” The question to be answered, Holmes said, “is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

Breyer, in an interview last September, is trying to figure out what that means in the 21st century.

“Holmes said it doesn’t mean you can shout ‘fire’ in a crowded theater,” Breyer said. “Well, what is it? Why? Because people will be trampled to death. And what is the crowded theater today? What is the being trampled to death?”

Whether Jones’ words and actions are or should be protected by the Constitution is a matter for the courts to decide. But in the court of public opinion and in the realm of religious ethics, Jones stands in violation of all that is right and just.

Jones should remove the dove from his church name and replace it with a more accurate symbol of what it stands for. A holy hand grenade, perhaps?

For the original article go here.