<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: As Washington Escalates Military Operations, American Officials &#8220;Discover&#8221; ISI-Taliban Nexus</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/03/as-washington-escalates-military-operations-american-officials-discover-isi-taliban-nexus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/03/as-washington-escalates-military-operations-american-officials-discover-isi-taliban-nexus/</link>
	<description>a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:58:11 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: rg the lg</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/03/as-washington-escalates-military-operations-american-officials-discover-isi-taliban-nexus/#comment-42318</link>
		<dc:creator>rg the lg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:46:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=7449#comment-42318</guid>
		<description>Once upon a time someone wrote a short piece about Americans being complicit,  there being NO innocents, when it came to 9/11.  Well, if this is only PARTIALLY true ... then we are more than just complicit.

I personally dislike conspiracy theory ... but 9/11 did make a questionable president into something of a hero for a time.  It does make one wonder, doesn&#039;t it?  Maybe 9/11 conspiracy theorists who saw Bush/Cheney, et al, wanting 9/11 weren&#039;t so off-base after all?

So, tell me ... does anyone really care?

In cynicism and doubt,
Skeptically yours,

RG the LG</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Once upon a time someone wrote a short piece about Americans being complicit,  there being NO innocents, when it came to 9/11.  Well, if this is only PARTIALLY true &#8230; then we are more than just complicit.</p>
<p>I personally dislike conspiracy theory &#8230; but 9/11 did make a questionable president into something of a hero for a time.  It does make one wonder, doesn&#8217;t it?  Maybe 9/11 conspiracy theorists who saw Bush/Cheney, et al, wanting 9/11 weren&#8217;t so off-base after all?</p>
<p>So, tell me &#8230; does anyone really care?</p>
<p>In cynicism and doubt,<br />
Skeptically yours,</p>
<p>RG the LG</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: burro</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/03/as-washington-escalates-military-operations-american-officials-discover-isi-taliban-nexus/#comment-42300</link>
		<dc:creator>burro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:12:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dissidentvoice.org/?p=7449#comment-42300</guid>
		<description>As I mentioned in a comment under &#039;Putting A New Coat on a Failed Strategy&#039;, Ted Rall describes this proposed pipeline in &#039;Gas War: The Truth Behind the American Occupation of Afghanistan&#039; (2002).
I respect the research and articles by Pepe Escobar and Michel Chossudovsky, but let&#039;s give credit to the the person who explained all of this to us 7 years ago.

I’d like to add that the U.S. is illegally giving financial aid to Pakistan. 
The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty of 1968 binds its nuclear-armed parties to refrain from transferring nuclear weapons technology to non-nuclear states; its non-nuclear parties agree not to acquire nuclear weapons; the right to develop civilian nuclear power is affirmed; and a vague commitment to eventual nuclear disarmament is also promised. All nations except four are parties to this treaty (189 parties), the exceptions being India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel.

Under the 1976 Symington Amendment to the Foreign Appropriations Bill of 1961, the United States is forbidden to give ANY financial aid to any nation developing nuclear weapons that is not a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Therefore, the U.S. has been illegally aiding Israel since 1976 and is now illegally aiding Pakistan to the tune of $5 billion. See http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5987406.ece</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I mentioned in a comment under &#8216;Putting A New Coat on a Failed Strategy&#8217;, Ted Rall describes this proposed pipeline in &#8216;Gas War: The Truth Behind the American Occupation of Afghanistan&#8217; (2002).<br />
I respect the research and articles by Pepe Escobar and Michel Chossudovsky, but let&#8217;s give credit to the the person who explained all of this to us 7 years ago.</p>
<p>I’d like to add that the U.S. is illegally giving financial aid to Pakistan.<br />
The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty of 1968 binds its nuclear-armed parties to refrain from transferring nuclear weapons technology to non-nuclear states; its non-nuclear parties agree not to acquire nuclear weapons; the right to develop civilian nuclear power is affirmed; and a vague commitment to eventual nuclear disarmament is also promised. All nations except four are parties to this treaty (189 parties), the exceptions being India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel.</p>
<p>Under the 1976 Symington Amendment to the Foreign Appropriations Bill of 1961, the United States is forbidden to give ANY financial aid to any nation developing nuclear weapons that is not a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.<br />
Therefore, the U.S. has been illegally aiding Israel since 1976 and is now illegally aiding Pakistan to the tune of $5 billion. See <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5987406.ece" rel="nofollow">http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5987406.ece</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
