When is a Talibani not a Taliban?

When the press wants to support peace talks, so pretend Haqqani aren't Taliban. However, Taliban are arranged in tribal ethnic groups to prevent discord. It isn't like a western-pattern military of strangers trained to be together.

.

The Haqqani Network has been a part of the Taliban since 1980, where it was supported among others by the CIA to fight Russia. they differ from Al Queda in that they're interested only in their country. They'd rather be the family gang that gets their own commodities than foreign corporations.

.

"Since its inception, the Haqqani Network has aimed to disrupt the Western military and political efforts in Afghanistan, driving them from the country permanently. The group is ideologically aligned with the Taliban, who seek to eradicate Western influence and restructure the government into a strictly Shariah-following state. The central goal is to disrupt the Western military and political efforts in Afghanistan, driving them from the country permanently. Global jihad has not been at the forefront of their goals or ideological foundations, thus minimizing their reach in other regions of the world."

...

" the Network benefits from financial support from wealthy individuals and organizations in the Gulf region, as well as through organized crime in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Network gets much of its revenue from criminal enterprises such as the illegal sale of chromite, timber smuggling, smuggling of precious jewels and metals. The Network has also utilized kidnapping and extortion in some instances, though this is not thought to be a significant portion of their activity.

.

It is reported that that the organizational headquarters of the Haqqani Network is in Miram Shah, where the group operates multiple base camps in order to facilitate and conduct activities such as weapons acquisitions, logistical planning, and military strategy formulation. The region is heavily Pashtun, separating the Haqqani network and their heavily centralized, tribal-emulating Pashtu leadership from more decentralized groups such as al-Qaeda. ... With more than 10,000 Taliban, al-Qaeda, and Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) militants under their control, the Haqqani Network orchestrates attacks by diverse militias throughout Pakistan and Afghanistan."

http://www.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/groups/view/363

.

"Taliban militants attacked key buildings near Afghanistan's presidential palace and the U.S. CIA headquarters in Kabul, a brazen assault that could derail attempts for peace talks to end 12 years of war.The Taliban, who have said they are willing to take part in talks with the United States and Afghan President Hamid Karzai's administration, said they launched the early morning assault, which triggered a 90-minute firefight.

...The area is home to the presidential palace compound, the Ministry of Defence and an annexe of the U.S. embassy at the old Ariana Hotel. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency's Afghanistan station is based there.

...

But Afghan security officials told Reuters they believed it had been carried out by the Taliban-linked Haqqani Network. The Haqqani Network is accused of masterminding high-profile attacks in Kabul and is believed to have close links to al Qaeda."

http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/06/25/afghanistan-attack-president-palace-idINDEE95O02220130625

To leave a comment, please sign in with
or or

Comments

  1. 29A

    I, for one, was shocked when the reports came out that the US was about to enter into negotiations with the Afghanistan Taliban because I would have figured they were on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations [FTO] List, but they aren’t. Amazing. The Pakistan Taliban are on it, but not the Afghan Taliban [another instance of when the Taliban aren’t the Taliban]. Perhaps the State Department foresaw the future need for such negotiations to extricate the US from Afghanistan.
    .
    But then, I read somewhere that the Iranian Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) was kept on the State Department’s FTO list until 2012 to keep the US on Iran’s good side. Oh, the intrigue of international politics.

    June 25, 2013
    1. livelonger

      The Iranian Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) was never Taliban, It is located in Iraq and Iran.
      It was also called:
      The National Liberation Army of Iran (the group’s armed wing)
      National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)
      It is more like the Baath Party of Syria, Iraq, and the Islamic Brotherhood that spreads over North Africa. They want a secular government with respect to Sharia law and independence from western governance.
      ..
      The Taliban is local to Afghanistan, was it’s main political party, and Pakistan, They want a Muslim government and Sharia law with independence from western influence. The Taliban’s promise – in Pashtun areas straddling Pakistan and Afghanistan – was to restore peace and security and enforce their own austere version of Sharia, or Islamic law, once in power.
      .
      The Bush war was to get even with the plane crashers from the United Arab Emirates on the Saudi Peninsula, by attacking Bin Laden’s Al Queda and the Taliban in Afghanistan that supported them, but the main attack was against Sadaam Hussain’s Iraq who had nothing to do with it. The Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) got caught in the middle while they were attacking Iran. Comparing the two can make rural American heads spin.
      .
      It seems the US has learned something, as the policy was to keep western with US troops out of Libya so there were no official ‘boots on the ground.’ That made a problem when the Benghazi CIA compound was attacked with US mercenaries ‘on the ground’ with much denials attempted until the media pushed for exposure.
      .
      The US is also gingerly steering clear of putting ‘boots on the ground’ in Syria as well; because landing there will create the US as a target for more Muslim groups like Hesbollah which will call for Muslims to come from all over the middle east to fight Americans. McCain either hasn’t heard of that lesson or could care less about the cost.

      June 25, 2013
      1. 29A

        It is my opinion that there is entirely too much hidden from the US populace in the name of ‘national security’. While there are no ‘official boots’ on the ground, I’m confident the CIA is in Syria. Personally, I disagree with McCain and think we need to stay out of that mess, not only for cost reasons but for political reasons.
        .
        My only reference to the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) was to state my amazement both that the MEK was on the US’s terrorist list, and that the Afghan Taliban wasn’t, being they have consistently been involved in terrorist operations against the US military in Afghanistan since 2001.

        June 26, 2013
        1. livelonger

          Seems the Taliban’s message is get out of town and we won’t follow,
          whereas
          Al Queda say they’ll follow you to your town, making threats as terrorists.

          June 26, 2013
        2. livelonger

          “think we need to stay out of that mess, not only for cost reasons but for political reasons. "
          .
          The US and western international banking and military elite didn’t estimate the cost of suppressing Muslim nations in order to withdraw commodities. Bin Laden had an idea of the extent and stated his intention to bankrupt the west through small actions. We’re now spending many billions a year to prevent single actions on US soil by perhaps ten people at most sent periodically.
          .
          When Muslims have no foreign troops on their soil (including CIA and their contractors); they no longer have to concentrate on their commandments in the Koran to expel invaders, the organizations to do that no longer have a function so have no need to exist. The cost of preventing organizations that don’t exist is very low.
          .
          Iraq wars were about preventing Muslims (Baath and Brotherhood) from using the Euro, controlling their own resources like oil, having their own stock exchanges, and using their own Sharia banking systems. The west will be paying for those wars and the costs of preventing the Muslim movement for decades to come, with reduced prosperity. The sequester is a cover for reducing government cost of war while keeping the military well-lubricated.
          .
          The 40 billion dollar expenditure for the border and immigration program just proposed is an extension on the program to prevent invasion with immigrants. Preventing the majority from becoming any skinned other than white skinned old men voters is a high priority for the Murdoch, Koch, Adelson international corporate crazies carrying on the Crusades.
          .
          The political reasons are the cost reasons.

          June 26, 2013
          1. 29A

            I was referring to politics in the Syrian sense that Assad is unacceptable to the Obama administration and the rebels are, for the most part, aligned with Al-Qaeda and wish to establish shariah law. Why should we lend a hand to either?
            .
            “The US and western international banking and military elite didn’t estimate the cost of suppressing Muslim nations in order to withdraw commodities. "
            .
            I am unaware of this suppression of Muslim nations in order to withdraw commodities. For instance, in Iraq, US companies were basically shut out of all oil contracts.
            .
            “When Muslims have no foreign troops on their soil (including CIA and their contractors); they no longer have to concentrate on their commandments in the Koran to expel invaders, the organizations to do that no longer have a function so have no need to exist. "
            .
            I disagree with the perception of the peaceableness of Muslims. The Koran doesn’t just advocate for Muslims to fight within their own land, but also to establish Islam worldwide. As denimyte said, "We have been told repeatedly that Islam has been hijacked by jihadists. Simply not true. If there actually are Muslims who reject jihad as described and practiced by Muhammad, they are the ones who have hijacked Islam. "
            http://denimyte.thoughts.com/posts/islam-pt-15-of-19
            .
            “The 40 billion dollar expenditure for the border and immigration program just proposed is an extension on the program to prevent invasion with immigrants. Preventing the majority from becoming any skinned other than white skinned old men…”
            .
            I disagree with your assessment here, believing that the point should be to uphold the US’s current immigration laws or reform them in a positive manner. I know the CBO published a report showing the beneficial effects of the Senate’s immigration reform – but it was filled with caveats, and will probably be revised. Cheaper than sealing the border, cut off the demand by mandating that employers use the E-Verify system. But it seems that the Senate is more focused on protecting the physical SS cards rather than protecting the integrity of the SS system.
            SEC. 3102. INCREASING SECURITY AND INTEGRITY OF SOCIAL SECURITY CARDS. (a) Fraud-resistant, Tamper-resistant, Wear-resistant, and Identity Theft-resistant Social Security Cards- "
            http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s744/text

            June 26, 2013
            1. Neighsayer

              what you say about Islam containing a world domination scheme, that they think everyone should follow Islam, while possibly true, would be just as true of Christianity, just as true for your side of the conflict.
              Also, your CIA is more than analogous to their Al-Quaeda.

              June 26, 2013
            2. Neighsayer

              So I guess the Taliban is like your Border Patrol.

              June 26, 2013
            3. 29A

              @Neighsayer
              I would disagree that the effort for world conquest is as strong within Christianity. While Jesus did issue the Great Commission, it was effected through preaching, not conquest. There’s about nothing good to say about the CIA.
              .
              “So I guess the Taliban is like your Border Patrol. "
              [You’re supposed to put a wink after that statement. ] It is my opinion that the Taliban asked for what they got in sheltering Bin Laden. The US’s Border Patrol is a far cry from the Taliban, since they don’t prevent women from going to school or mutilate them if they go.

              June 26, 2013
            4. livelonger

              LOL, so the western world asked for what they got by sheltering the CIA.

              June 26, 2013
            5. Neighsayer

              @29A:
              Well, Christian world domination is more Old Testament, but Christians haven’t thrown out that half of their Bible, have they? And – the fact that Christian America already dominates the world might also be a clue . . .

              June 26, 2013
            6. 29A

              @LL You’re not wrong about that.
              @Neighsayer
              I didn’t think the OT ever was about world domination, although now Jews do make up a large percentage in the fields of TV and banking. What appears to have taken place is that, for some reason, the sciences and economics were more amenable to the climate of Christianity [which admittedly wasn’t that good] than they were to that of Islam. Imo, the current position of ‘Christian dominion’ in world is the result of those advances, and not due to some religious policy.

              June 26, 2013
            7. livelonger

              The OT was about Hebrews dominating their entire world of the little piece of land between what is Turkey today and Egypt.
              .
              World domination now is about Neo-Con military industrial with international corporations controlling world resources that have no regard for any religion other than the belief in eternal stock growth. Muslim, Christian and any other moral persuasions are in the way.

              June 26, 2013
            8. livelonger

              The economic importance of the OT was control of the overland spice routes at the end of the Euphrates in what is now Syria to what is Turkey and west and south toward Egypt and north Africa, It was a key place to take tolls on the way through.

              June 26, 2013
            9. Neighsayer

              Of course Christians and Muslims want the whole world to be in their control, and of course the Bible is all about world domination. Have you perused the OT? “Be fruitful and multiply across the land?”
              Islam is in a younger phase of a religion’s life cycle. The Islamists now are in about the same period Christianity was in 500 years ago, Calvinism, the Inquisition, all that. If all goes well, humanism will temper Islam like it did Christianity, at least for the masses (I don’t think Christianity is very humanist yet, in terms of our rulers, and foreign policy), and maybe a lot faster, everything moves faster every year. But not immediately. It’s hard to spread humanism with M-16s and flying killer robots.

              June 26, 2013
            10. 29A

              No doubt, both would like to be in sole control of the earth, it is their idea of a utopia. But I would argue that Islam is fundamentally different than Christianity. The Koran spends large amounts of time lauding its own perspicaciousness [which if you’ve read it, it’s not], its own truth, and noting the punishments for those who don’t believe.
              .
              “Be fruitful and multiply across the land” is mild compared to the Koranic passages which command believers to conquer or prevail over all other religions, no matter their aversion. The thought is important enough to be repeated three times, and there is nothing similar to it in the Bible. And true Muslims spend their days reciting the Koran.
              .
              “He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse. " 61:9
              “He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion. And Allah sufficeth as a Witness. " 48:28
              “He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion, however much the idolaters may be averse. " 9:33

              June 26, 2013
            11. livelonger

              So what is it you want everyone else to take from that. (Which in itself would be a naive dream, as not everyone will accept one belief or interpretation.)
              .
              There are Muslims who won’t follow Jihad or those commandments, as there are Christians who won’t follow everything said in the Bible. There is no single religious hierarchy in the Muslim religion to command everyone nor demand adherence to every sentence, the source of the rift between the major sects. Religions spend much time lauding their own self-defined perspicacious views to convince others to follow them.

              June 26, 2013
            12. 29A

              I guess people can take from it what they want. All I can say is that Muslims read the Koran and remain Muslim – and that says something. The sections I quoted are clear enough so that no interpretation by any single hierarchy is necessary for them to independently arrive at the same conclusion. You may claim they don’t necessarily follow it, but I’m unaware there are any stats on the subject.

              June 27, 2013
            13. livelonger

              Part of your assumptions are that all read the Koran. However, it is in Arabic and besides many not being able to read, many have difficulty with Arabic. Most just follow what they’re told, and not all are told the pillar of Jihad. If they do or don’t read the Koran, when their entire family and tribe believes one way and they would be killed or banned for leaving or entertaining another faith, they tend to follow.

              June 27, 2013
            14. 29A

              Again there are no stats to indicate the percentages of Muslims who have or have not read the Koran. Koran means recitation, and even though they cannot read, many are taught to recite it, though as you point out, some may not understand Arabic. At any rate, some type of teaching goes on in their mosques, to which I’m not privy – I attempted to check one out, but when they told me to remove my boots, I left instead.
              .
              In the end, one cannot make the determination of how dearly they hold to things written in the Koran or hadith, but the fact that such things are contained in those writings cannot be ignored as a possible motivation for their beliefs and actions.
              .
              While it is up for discussion the weight given to certain Koranic passages, the near-worldwide riots by both literate and illiterate Muslims when their prophet is ‘disrespected’ is one indication as to their levels of devotion to these writings, and this is one external by which outsiders can determine the internals of the Islamic religion. Another is the proclamations by important Islamic figures, which, when not condemned by others, also gives indication to the internal discussions and beliefs of Islam, and one cannot deny those proclamations are often jingoistic and worse.
              .
              You can attempt to exonerate some of these by saying again, that there is no single hierarchical figure to which Muslims look, but when a wide spectrum of Muslim thinkers offer similar thinking and comments, it would be blindness to ignore the writing on the wall. Yes, there are more moderate Muslim voices, but they get not nearly the publicity of those who are pointedly referred to as ‘extremists’, by the politically-correct.

              June 27, 2013
            15. livelonger

              The ordinary response is that Christians read the Bible and have Bible studies in their own language; yet few advocate slavery, polygamy, and stoning. There are no teachings against such in either book of the Bible.
              .
              Your argument works in that some of them become so involved in their religion that they take the parts of Jihad seriously enough that several million will look for a vocation in war, and thousands out of 2 billion will turn insanely violent spouting religious phrases. Hardly different than right-wing-nuts.
              .
              If you’re looking at 5 million Muslim Americans as people that should be interned, that’s one problem.

              June 27, 2013
            16. Neighsayer

              @29A:
              ““Be fruitful and multiply across the land” is mild compared to the Koranic passages which command believers to conquer or prevail over all other religions, no matter their aversion.”

              I’m not gonna look it up unless you make me, but the OT is full of instances of God saying to his people “I give you this land, but I leave it to you to slaughter the current inhabitants. Don’t worry, I’m with you, you can’t lose.”

              Of course that is the template for all three of the Bible peoples, Jews, then Christians, then Muslims. They all have the same attitude, and this argument can be made in all three faiths: that the great unwashed, the good, salt-of-the-Earth folks don’t dream of world domination, but, like it or not, all the leaders do. And through the churches (and the media), they get the people to follow them.

              This is why I’m arguing with you here. Muslim bashing feeds the wars, and really, we’re not that different. Most of the world’s Muslims are just regular people, and the rich and the leaders of the Christian world are just as bloodthirsty as the Muslim leaders. Again, like it or not.

              June 27, 2013
            17. 29A

              @LL “yet few advocate slavery, polygamy, and stoning.”
              .
              At least they don’t usually publicly announce such things – it would be politically incorrect. Yet many here on thoughts publicly condemn homosexuality which has all the support of a verse or two in the OT. The question then comes down to what they truly believe, and what they are willing to say.

              June 27, 2013
            18. 29A

              Yes, the OT does say those things, it seems to me to be geared more towards a small locale than towards the world at large. The Jews were ’God’s chosen people, but there was no effort to convert others. I haven’t bashed Muslims [I’ve pointed out things they have done, such as riots], what I’m bashing is their religious texts and what they advocate.

              June 27, 2013
            19. livelonger

              Yes, I’ve read the passages in most religions, including the OT and Koran. Moses went to the Midianites, married into them, went back to Egypt, then had his Hebrews slaughter the Midianites. Movement into the promised land was assured by slaughter.
              .
              Religious philosophy of the time was to violently achieve supremacy. There was no other civil law. Mohammed took the same philosophy from Arianist Christians in his area slaughtering others and incorporated it into his diary called the Koran.
              .
              American history is a result of Catholic and Protestant European monarchs slaughtering millions to prove they had the inside track on God, so many left to America.
              ..
              I see the Koran as a parallel of the Old Testament as is to me the Mormon texts.
              .
              Again, the result for the future is who believes and practices what. So far we haven’t seen the American Christian churches able to force the population to follow their rules; but it’s possible if and when our democracy changes back to religious law, that of the Muslim experience.

              June 27, 2013
            20. livelonger

              “The Sassanids however did not always pose a threat to Mecca as in 575 CE they actually protected the Arabian city from invasion of the Kingdom of Axum, led by its Christian leader Abraha. The tribes of the southern Arabia, asked the Persian king Khosrau I for aid, in response to which he came south to Arabia with both foot-soldiers and a fleet of ships into Mecca. The Persian intervention prevented Christianity from spreading eastward into Arabia, and Mecca and the Islamic prophet Muhammad who was at the time a six year boy in the Quraysh tribe “would not grow up under the cross.”34"
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecca

              June 27, 2013
            21. Neighsayer

              my answers here would only be to repeat myself, so I won’t. Despite what you say about it, it’s part of the war, part of the clash of cultures, whether we’re “nice, good Christians” or not.

              June 27, 2013
            22. livelonger

              “Muslim bashing feeds the wars, and really, we’re not that different. Most of the world’s Muslims are just regular people, and the rich and the leaders of the Christian world are just as bloodthirsty as the Muslim leaders.”
              The main point.
              .
              I see a difference, in that the leadership of the western world isn’t Christian; but more ‘casino capitalism.’
              http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-twilight-of-casino-capitalism/

              June 27, 2013
          2. livelonger

            I can respect your opinion, because it’s the more commonly held one in defense of international corporate control that is displayed by the heirarchy media.
            .
            I never said Muslims were peaceable; but I can understand why you might want to create a straw man argument to divert. Muslims always have been tribal organizations in competition with each other, like any gang, whether royalty or street. However, as with Christianity, there are all degrees, from Crusader (Jihad for Christianity) to peaceful commune. Neo-con military-industrial complex adherents need to simplify them into one enemy. One reason many Muslims would like to reestablish the Ottoman Empire pattern is that they left the local tribal communities run their own tribes, so long as they gave tribute (taxes.)
            .
            I notice that you haven’t disagreed with the idea that if there are no invaders, there’s no purpose to eject invaders.
            .
            I can also see where extending the immigration policy to worldwide imperial policies ties together macro and micro-economics that make it more difficult to see the US policy as patriotic.
            .
            Social Security cards are another matter that creates better control of who is and who isn’t a citizen, which is good for international identity as well. I can totally agree with requiring employers to use e-Verify; but it has less to do with this thread about Taliban, so is a diversionary tactic to avoid international ramifications of US policy.

            June 26, 2013
            1. 29A

              I realize Islam isn’t monolithic, but they all read the same Koran, which posits Islam as the one true religion, that should conquer/prevail over all others. The Ottoman Empire is not 100 years dead, and within the memory of some.
              .
              True you didn’t say Muslims were peaceable, but you indicated that their only intention was to evict invaders in their lands, which historically doesn’t hold, they were out to convert through conquest. Now they have resorted to more subtle methods, such as the establishment of shariah courts within the UK, the characterizing any critique of Islam as hate-speech and racism, and the introduction of anti-defamation resolutions at the UN.
              .
              Invaders, such as ‘undocumented workers’? Yes those who violate our immigration laws are invaders, and should be ejected. Not so much as a patriotic stance, just that the current immigration laws were duly constituted by our elected representatives and are the best we could come up with – they should be respected as such. The world is full of people, other countries need to fix their own countries, not hop the fence to come to ours. Usually the US is willing to ‘help’ those with the wherewithall to help themselves, the maligned democracy building efforts.
              .

              I brought up E-Verify, not as a diversionary tactic, but as a response to your mentioning the immigration bill’s $40 billion securitization of the border.
              .
              Well, it is estimated that 10% of the Mexican population is in the US illegally, which translates to about 15% of their workforce. I heard the other day that after oil, Mexico’s secondary source of income is remittances from workers here in the US.
              .
              What do you say are the international ramifications of US immigration policy, other than that the deportation of 11 million Mexicans back to Mexico might cause them economic problems?

              June 26, 2013
            2. livelonger

              You’ve mixed groups.
              “True you didn’t say Muslims were peaceable, but you indicated that their only intention was to evict invaders in their lands”
              .
              You need to watch the word ‘they’.
              .
              Some Muslims are peaceable, some not, whether they read the Koran or not. However, Taliban aren’t all of the Muslims, and Taliban definitely want to expel foreign military.
              .
              Muslims moving to other nations might think their Sharia law is best, but not many get their way.
              .
              I say that diversion to another subject – of Mexican immigration – is another thread worthy of posting separately.
              .

              June 26, 2013
            3. 29A

              I’ll grant that the only known effort of the Taliban is to evict the ‘invaders’, although they gave shelter to Osama bin Laden who acted internationally. And I was loose with the use of ‘they’. But what Muslims don’t read the Koran? To my knowledge, the only real debate among them is over the validity of the various Hadith, between Shia, Sunni, etc. I’ve seen their arguments on Yahoo Answers, the Sunni slur the Shia as Zoroastrians.
              .
              Here’s my immigration post.
              http://29a.thoughts.com/posts/if-congress-were-serious-about-fixing-the-immigration-problem

              June 26, 2013
            4. livelonger

              Many Muslim groups shun other Muslim groups. The rulers of Syria, Alewites, are generally shunned by many Shia and Sunni. That’s why hopes of unity under democracy as wanted by many Muslim groups with Sharia law are empty naive dreams of westerners.
              .
              The Taliban gave shelter to many other different Muslim groups; they were the government of Afghanistan for a period where the only hope to govern was to include other groups in the nation.

              June 26, 2013
        3. This comment has been deleted
  2. brn2bme

    I believe the Taliban possibly siezes to exist when funding taps out.

    http://blogs.reuters.com/global/2009/08/13/who-is-funding-the-afghan-taliban-you-dont-want-to-know/

    June 27, 2013
    1. livelonger

      However, their funding never taps out. They might shrink back to do less, but wouldn’t disappear, especially when the US leaves and there’s less expense due to no need to fight outsiders, They then would settle back to ‘administrate’ their country as the government takes ushr and/or zakat.
      .
      “But in areas under Taliban control, the insurgents are extorting funds from the people as well.
      .
      In war-ravaged Helmand, where much of the province has been under Taliban control for the past two years, residents grumble about the tariffs.
      .
      “It’s a disaster,” said a 50-year-old resident of Marja district. “We have to give them two kilos of poppy paste per jerib during the harvest; then we have to give them ushr (an Islamic tax, amounting to one-tenth of the harvest) from our wheat. Then they insisted on zakat (an Islamic tithe). Now they have come up with something else: 12,000 Pakistani rupee (approximately $150) per household. And they won’t take even one rupee less.”
      .
      It all adds up, of course. But all thingsare relative: if the Taliban are able to raise and spend say $1 billion per year — the outside limit of what anyone has been able to predict — that accounts for what the United States is now spending on 10 days of the war to defeat them.

      June 27, 2013
  3. brn2bme

    Or better yet; http://www.thenation.com/article/how-us-funds-taliban#axzz2XNFOtPBW

    June 27, 2013
    1. livelonger

      The theory here is that if there were no western military nor contractors, the country wouldn’t exist nor have their own farmers and cities – a self-flattery of westerners.
      .
      The Taliban is working to have just that, so they can be back in charge of a primarily agricultural society, some drug traffic, with protection rackets for mining and petroleum corporations paying them as they’ve done for millennia.

      June 27, 2013