Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 27, 2018

'Western' Press Dislikes Imran Khan's Win In Pakistan's Election

Imran Khan election win in Pakistan receives a hostile reaction in U.S. and British media. The headlines are generally negative and the descriptions of Imran cast a damning light of him.

From the New York Times print edition front page:


The word "Pakistan" was probably too long for the valuable front-page space. Thus the NYT shortened it to "Nuclear-Armed Islamic Republic". The attribute "unpredictable" for Imran Khan is curious. (If one cuts out the "Islamic" the headline fits to Trump's election victory. Was that the intended joke?)

The piece by Jeffrey Gettleman repeats the "unpredictable" claim:

Friends and foes describe Mr. Khan, 65, as relentless, charming, swaggering and highly unpredictable.

But there is no evidence, not one example in the piece that supports that attribute. It describes how he, in the late 90s, entered politics:

Mr. Khan seized on a single issue: governance. ... He focused on corruption, repeatedly stating that a few political dynasties had shamelessly enriched themselves. ... [H]e seemed adept at not letting the gossip pages distract him, and he kept hammering on about corruption.

Corruption was also a main theme of his recent campaign. Imran's anti-corruption position has been a constant. His opposition to the U.S. war of terror also never changed. There is not one "unpredictable" bit in his political positions. Where then did that come from? Only in the very last paragraph that word returns:

Many analysts wonder how long Mr. Khan’s friendship with the military will last.

“He is known to have erratic behavior and a very unpredictable personality,” said Taha Siddiqui, a journalist and critic of the military who recently moved to France, saying he feared for his safety.

Siddiqui worked for an Indian TV channel and for France24. He has long been critical of Pakistan's military. In January he claimed that "he was attacked by up to a dozen men en route to the airport in Rawalpindi but managed to escape". He clearly dislikes that Imran Khan has good relations with Pakistan's military.  Why is that enough to make it in into a headline?

The London Times takes up the theme in this cartoon:


It's a cheap point. During the last 50 years there never was a prime minister of Pakistan who could act against the will of the powerful military. If the Bhutto clan and its PPP party or the Nawaz clan with PML-N had won the election their candidates would have had similar restrictions on foreign policy than Imran Khan will have.

The losing candidates will protest against the election results. They assert fraud but have yet to give examples for such.

The EU Election Observer Mission published its preliminary report. It lists some minor issues but seems satisfied. It reports no election fraud. It's most serious complain is the "uneven playing field". Via Dawn:

Addressing a press conference in Islamabad, EU Chief Observer Michael Gahler [...] said, “Despite positive changes to the legal framework with the new Elections Act, and a stronger and more transparent Election Commission, we consider that the electoral process of 2018 was negatively affected by the political environment.”

“Candidates with large political appeal and financial means, the so-called “electables” were reported to often dominate the campaign. Uneven rules on campaign spending further undermined candidates’ equal opportunity,” the EU EOM observed.

Rich candidates spend more than poor ones and have a higher chance of winning elections. That is unfair. Have we ever heard of any other 'democracy' with a similar problem?

Posted by b on July 27, 2018 at 18:47 UTC | Permalink

« previous page


“al Queda were known to attack a target again if they were not successful the first time. Many people forget that al Queda had attacked the World Trade Center in 1993.”

First I'm happy to read that your loved ones were not casualties of either of the attacks on the WTC.

But, al Qaeda was not named in the WTC bombing in 1993. MSM may have floated their name around, but FBI didn't.

But you know who was centrally involved?

The FBI. They planned it, picked the patsies, provided the explosives and then “forgot” to call it off. Their “informant,” Emad Salem testified to all the above. FBI tried to blow him off, but fearing he was being set up, he secretly recorded a phone call with his FBI handler which spells it out at about 3:30 in this tape.

It’s a very rare thing for any “terrorist attack” in the US to not have FBI’s direct influence.

If you're not tuned into the overwhelming evidence that al Qaeda was always a CIA construct, please look into it. Like ISIL, the new boogey man when al CIAduh stopped sounding so scary, the AZ Empire may not have the tightest of leashes on the extremists within those mercenary armies, but none of them could exist without the Empire's funding, founding and continued backing.

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 29 2018 22:52 utc | 101

Daniel 101. Thanks for setting the record strait in regards to FBI role in almost every domestic terrorism plot 'foiled' in merica.

Posted by: Tannenhouser | Jul 29 2018 23:05 utc | 102

Daniel @101

Yes. You're right about the FBI but I'm sure that al Queda was named as suspect or took credit. Not immediately but in the years afterward.

Yes. US, Saudis, and Paks created al Queda. But they lost interest after the Soviet-Afghan War and lost control if the group. In fact, it was reported that the Clinton administration tried to kill bin Laden by homing into the signal of his mobile phone.

AFAICT Bin Laden's beef was primarily with Saudi Kingdom. But he knew that the Saudi Kingdom can not be overthrown as long as USA supports them.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 29 2018 23:31 utc | 103

More about Giuliani

From Wikipedia:

Giuliani claimed to have been at the Ground Zero site "as often, if not more, than most workers... I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them." Some 9/11 workers have objected to those claims. While his appointment logs were unavailable for the six days immediately following the attacks, Giuliani spent a total of 29 hours over three months at the site. This contrasted with recovery workers at the site who spent this much time at the site in two to three days.

Giuliani initially downplayed the health effects arising from the September 11 attacks in the Financial District and lower Manhattan areas in the vicinity of the World Trade Center site. He moved quickly to reopen Wall Street, and it was reopened on September 17. In the first month after the attacks, he said "The air quality is safe and acceptable." However, in the weeks after the attacks, the United States Geological Survey identified hundreds of asbestos 'hot spots' of debris dust that remained on buildings. By the end of the month the USGS reported that the toxicity of the debris was akin to that of drain cleaner. It would eventually be determined that a wide swath of lower Manhattan and Brooklyn had been heavily contaminated by highly caustic and toxic materials.

In the years after 9-11 hundreds of workers and thousands of downtown residents would develop serious health problems like cancers.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 29 2018 23:41 utc | 104

Jack Rabbit@103

They hardly lost interest in AQ after Afghanistan. They simply redeployed them to Chechnya and the Balkans and after 9/11 Iraq and elsewhere.

As for 911 I no longer discuss this subject but read a couple of David Ray Griffins books. Interesting stuff in the late Philip Marshalls final book "Big Bamboozle" as well

Posted by: Pft | Jul 29 2018 23:50 utc | 105

Jack, you are towing the party line if you believe AQ and IS are creations that went "rogue". These are programs dedicated to the role of maintaining the existence of boogeymen for the furtherance of A-GWOT weapons sale agenda of the MIC and B-Divide et Impera Aeternus via regime change and destabilisation campaigns..

Posted by: Lozion | Jul 29 2018 23:52 utc | 106

Jackrabbit 103

US UK were working closely with the jihadists in Chechnya. Perhaps a little in the breakdown of the former Ygoslavia, working directly with them in Libya and then in Syria. What was started in the early eighties has never been discontinued by the US. I think just using the name Al Qaeda to look at this group of US proxies is misleading.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Jul 30 2018 0:01 utc | 107

Pft: They simply redeployed them to Chechnya and the Balkans

Lozion: towing the party line if you believe AQ and IS are creations that went "rogue"

Peter AU 1

I respect your opinion on this. I didn't follow Chechnya and Balkans wars very closely but I have seen how ISIS and al Queda have been used in Libya and Syria.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 30 2018 1:15 utc | 108

interesting conversation...

as for al qaeda and isis and who is responsible for starting them and funding them - i think we can see the answer to this in the war in syria, without having to revert further back in time... saudi arabia / uae / qatar and a good bit of money/logistics and etc . etc. with the generous support of usa/uk and western countries... sorry - but that is how i see it... i mostly blame the usa/uk for being in a commanding position and fucking up the planet big time..

Posted by: james | Jul 30 2018 3:11 utc | 109

james & Jack, dont forget the Mossad, Pakistan's ISI, GCHQ, DGSE, etc. but ultimately the Alphabet agencies are just implementers of the Programs, not the decision makers. That happens on a whole other level..

Posted by: Lozion | Jul 30 2018 3:27 utc | 110

lozion - as i recall mossad and isi had a hand in 9-11... too many old threads back to remember it all, but that is what i recall.. the biggest irony was the bin laden family being flown out around the same time as this happened! something about connections with bush family and carlyle group and that they must be allowed to return to ksa! 9-11 looked like an extremely useful set up to put in motion all the crazy shit that has been happening since..

Posted by: james | Jul 30 2018 3:32 utc | 111


the likes of 9 11 and on a lesser scale MH17, require few loose lips at the higher levels. Loose lips on the lower levels are easily silenced forever.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Jul 30 2018 3:38 utc | 112

James 111. 9/11 was the 'pearl harbor type event' manufactured/foretold by the project for a new american century. It spawned the GWOT, full spectrum dominance and reorganized the American armed forces according to mentorship provided by the prince family. As well of course other crazy shit, as you say.

Posted by: Tannenhouser | Jul 30 2018 4:36 utc | 113

Yes, Jackrabbit @103. We are told that the Clinton Administration tried to kill bin Laden. That was the "reason" for blowing up the only pharmaceutical factory in central Africa. Oh, and that was in one of the "7 countries to take out in 5 years" that Supreme Yugoslav war criminal, General Wesley Clark told us about. And wouldn't you know it, that country was literally torn asunder into two failed states (but the oil still flows).

Then, "Counter-Terrorism Czar" Richard Clark stopped a cruise missile hit on a bin Laden hunting camp because some of Clark's UAE friends were in the hunting party. But the Republican Partisans like to say that was all a "tail wagging the dog" to divert attention away from a certain stained blue dress.

Some of these Jihadists surely believe the religious fantasies that motivate them. And I would expect that once in a while, those religious nut jobs go too far "off script," and have to be "neutralized." Just like a good, trustworthy, longtime partner of CIA in narcotics smuggling like Noriega can get too big for his britches and need to be given a little time off in solitary confinement.

Besides, it was a great way to test out some new weapons. Have you seen the documentary, "Panama Deception?" Wow! Only after the microwave "Active Denial System" trucks were quietly pulled out of Iraq after a couple of over-stimulated US soldiers turned the volume up to 11 did we find out what weapon could shrink-melt a human being without burning their clothes.

But all of these Wahhabi nut jobs and straight-up mercenaries have been recruited, trained, armed and paid by the AZ Empire. KSA and Pakistan are middle men.

Really, I can provide plenty of documentation for all of the above. Or, you can do a search at sources you trust. Sure, there's a lot of controlled opposition disinformation out there, but when one sees a consistent strategy playing out for more than a century, it's hard to deny.

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 30 2018 6:17 utc | 114

Posted by: Lozion @110

"dont forget the Mossad, Pakistan's ISI, GCHQ, DGSE, etc. but ultimately the Alphabet agencies are just implementers of the Programs, not the decision makers. That happens on a whole other level.."

Exactly! Even reaching the level of blaming the Intelligence Agencies is still a "limited hangout." Who do they work for?

A good hint comes from the first Eisenhower Administration. CIA was still a tiny organization to collect the intelligence gathered by other groups (US Naval Intelligence is the oldest and still biggest in the US). Their purpose was to present a President with digestible information for decision making, not to plan, let alone execute policies.

But Ike hired one Wall Street Lawyer Dulles Brother to be Director of CIA, and the other Wall Street Lawyer Dulles Brother to be Secretary of State. That is as good a time as any to demarcate the origin of today's "Deep State." Though of course, its predecessors go back much further.

Wall Street, City of London, Vatican City, and a few other supra-national bankster centers. Those are the loci of policy-planning power.

Ike has been somewhat beatified as the General who fought "the good war," and the President who tried to warn us about the "Military/Industrial Complex." But he also signed off on the coups in Iran in 1953 and Guatemala in 1954, and the torture and murder of Patrice Lumumba (no doubt rushed somewhat when Ike's handlers realized that JFK was to be President, and he'd spoken favorably about the end of colonialism, specifically in Africa).

Ike oversaw the greatest growth of that MIC in US peacetime history. The US had several hundred nukes when he moved into the White House, and something like 18,000 when he walked out the back door.... giving us that fateful warning after it was too late for him (or apparently any President) to do anything about it.

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 30 2018 6:40 utc | 115

@115 Daniel. The "Deep State", the "PTB", the "Oligarchs", the "Banksters", the "Anglozionists", the "Cabal", the "Bilderbergers", the "Illumininati", etc. ad infinitum, are ALL "limited hangout" terms to misdirect everyone away from the very few who pull the strings, and no I dont mean the "joos" for that also is a red herring..

They are few now, losing their power and omnipotence and they know it.
Their time is ending.

Posted by: Lozion | Jul 30 2018 18:06 utc | 116

Follow up @108

While I didn't follow it closely, I am aware of Chechnya and Balkans wars.

My impression was that these were "home-grown" in that the vast majority of foot soldiers were locals. I know that Saudis stirred up the locals in Balkans with funding of religious schools/initiatives and I suspect that that may have been true in Chechnya also.

So, it seems to me that prior to 9-11 the Jihadi ideology was "weaponized" and used in places of convenience. It's logical that such destabilizing may have included sending some talented fighters, recuiters, and propagandists with Jihad experience. In the 90's that would've been former Afghan Mujaheddin.

What we didn't see was the global recruiting and transport of Jihadis like what has occurred with ISIS. In Libya and Syria we have seen Jihadis mobilized and used as a supra-national fighting force. Thus, for example, ISIS has been relocated to Afghanistan.

So I think there has been an evolution in how Jihadi/Jihadis have been used to further elite interests.


Is this perspective correct or flawed? Interested in any thoughts on the matter.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 30 2018 18:56 utc | 117

Jack, afghan mujahideen to KLA to AQ to MORO to Ansar Dine to IS/IL /ISIL To ISIS/MORO to Al Nusra to HTS. All pawns to those listed and not listed @116..

Posted by: Lozion | Jul 30 2018 20:16 utc | 118

Jackrabbit @117. Sure, the utilization of mostly Wahhabi extremists has evolved since the days of WW I when the British used them to conquer Arabia and help destroy the Ottoman Empire. Covert use of them to help overthrow the Mosaddegh government in Iran in 1953 followed an entirely different tactical approach than the open warfare in the early days.

Similarly, use of them again in Iran in 1979/1980 was tactically very different as I now see it, in that the goal was a counter-revolution against the secular, socialist Iranian Revolution which had driven the Shah and many of his cohorts out of the country more than a year before the Ayatollah's boys were able to hijack the Revolution. Elections that established the Revolutionary Republican government had already been held before the Islamic counter-revolutionaries were able to secure their "supreme" authority over the Republic.

And yes indeed, the ISIS operation has been different than any before. Having al Jazeera broadcasting calls for Muslims from around the world to pour into Syria to topple the hated secular government was an enormous boost compared to the networking of largely under-the-radar communications that preceded it. Then we saw the amazing internet PR campaign, with those high-quality, very professional videos that made the US Army recruiting videos shown during professional sports events seem amateurish in comparison.

That many of those Jihadi recruiting videos, complete with staged gruesome executions were introduced to the West by the Israeli SITE Intelligence operation of Rita Katz never seemed to cause much skepticism, even on "alternative" sites.

So basically, what I see is a long-term strategy of using Islamic religious nut jobs to help the AZ Empire achieve its goals. For various reasons, the precise tactics change over time and location.

But as long as the goal remains (dominance of the energy industry locally and global dominance of all aspects of economic geopolitical realms), the strategy continues.

Posted by: Daniel | Jul 30 2018 20:52 utc | 119

Pakistan Elites: "We know there was fraud in the election because there always has been. It's just this time it wasn't enough for us to win."

Posted by: tomarse | Jul 31 2018 0:54 utc | 120

I would have thought that just like the UK, Pakistan's nuclear weapons would be under US observation, if not control.

Posted by: Ray Visino | Aug 6 2018 22:43 utc | 121

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.