History Channel 2 Hour Documentary Premier: The True Story of Charlie Wilson

Intel Community: Military killed Benazir Bhutto
Middle East Times
By Claude Salhani, Editor
Dec. 31, 2007

Lower and middle level officers of the Pakistani army and the Pakistani air force were involved in the killing of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, according to various intelligence sources, including members of India's counter-intelligence service. Well-informed sources have told the Middle East Times that these rogue elements of the Pakistani military support the jihadis and share their extremist views of an ultra-conservative form of Islam.

One former CIA official told a Middle East Times source that, "It's worrying when half of your lower or mid-level Pak intelligence analysts have bin Laden screen-savers on their computers."

The conclusion of a number of U.S. analysts is that al-Qaida and other jihadis have successfully penetrated the armed forces and security services in Pakistan. If these findings are substantiated it could be a matter of grave concern, given the fact that Pakistan is in possession of nuclear weapons.

Should the radical elements of Pakistan's military ever succeed in overthrowing the current regime and taking over the country, it would radically alter the geo-political map of the region -- and not for the better, either. A nuclear-armed Pakistan run by pro-bin Laden sympathizers would likely initiate a climate of high tension not only with neighboring India, but could extend towards the already volatile Middle East.

Backing up their theory that pro-extremists found sympathy and support among influential people in the Pakistani security forces, the sources cited the example of Rashi Rauf, the prime suspect in a recent plot to blow up 10 U.S. passenger airplanes in the United Kingdom last year. Rauf escaped last week while being taken from court in Rawalpindi. The prime suspects are the security personnel, who some believe, have facilitated Rauf's escape, the sources said.

Of the seven or eight attempts to assassinate President Pervez Musharraf, two took place in December 2003 when rockets were fired at his vehicle during a visit to Rawalpindi, the same city where Bhutto was killed on Thursday. Then there was the attempt to fire on his plane with an anti-aircraft gun in early 2007. There were also two suicide attacks on the Army's General HQ and two attacks outside the offices of the ISI, after Pakistani security forces, on Musharraf's orders, assaulted the Red Mosque, the Lal Masjid, in Islamabad last July when Islamists retrenched inside the mosque with scores of hostages. Following the two attacks on Musharraf, junior army and air force officers were arrested. The ensuing investigation discovered that they had ties with Jaish-e-Mohammad, an Islamist group. In the rocket attack, the son of an army brigadier general was arrested. The source says, however, that only lower-ranking army officials were arrested and court-martialed. The investigations are dead in the water.

Bhutto's main fear, according to a well-placed source, was that Brig. Gen. (rtd) Ijaz Shah of the Pakistani IB would prove a grave threat to her. She was worried about security but did not make it a big issue until Dec. 26 when she complained that the electronic jammers used to neutralize IED's were faulty.

But one U.S. analyst familiar with the situation told the Middle East Times that Mrs. Bhutto was warned of security issues. "She was warned of the dangers yet she continued to behave in a way in which the Secret Service in the U.S. would never accept," said Thomas Houlahan, director of military assessment with the Center for Security and Science in Washington, D.C. "She insisted on having her own people run her protection," said Houlahan, who added, "but nothing would protect her when she decided to stand through the sun roof of her car. "That was extremely reckless," said Houlahan. "I don't see what could have been done."

Opposition to Benazir Bhutto was to be found not only in the country's army and air force from bin Laden sympathizers, but also from old (President of Pakistan) Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq (1) (Joanne Herring’s major allie in Charlie Wilson’s War - JJ) loyalists who did not want the daughter of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in a position of power. "They especially loathed the idea that Bhutto had pledged the United States to allow U.S. intelligence to interrogate rogue atomic scientist A.Q. Khan and allow U.S. forces to hunt for bin Laden on Pakistani soil," said the source.

"She did not have much of a chance." The general view among many in the intelligence community is that Musharraf himself is a marked man and not likely to stay in power too long. The question is this: If the Islamists ever succeed in removing Musharraf, with Bhutto now gone, who would be likely to govern Pakistan and gain control of its nuclear arsenal?

http://www.metimes.com/International/2007/12/31/intel_community_military_killed_bhutto/3547/
Comments may be sent to Claude@metimes.com

@ @ @

(1) General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq (b. August 12, 1924–August 17, 1988) was the president and military ruler of Pakistan from July 1977 to his death in August 1988. Appointed Chief of Army Staff in 1976, General Zia-ul-Haq came to power after he overthrew ruling Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in a military coup d'état on July 5, 1977 and became the state's third ruler to impose martial law. The coup itself was largely bloodless, but Bhutto was subsequently tried and executed. Zia initially ruled for a year as martial law administrator, and later assumed the post of President of Pakistan in September 1978. Zia was killed along with several of his top generals and the then United States Ambassador to Pakistan Arnold Lewis Raphel in a mysterious aircraft crash on August 17, 1988, the circumstances of which remain unclear. His death and the death of the American Ambassador is considered by many high ranking officials to be a well planned assassination.

Posted for FlAttorney by MAR

Charlie Wilson's Way And Another Bhutto's Death
by Fred Schruers
Dec 29 2007

ARTICLE FOOTNOTE REFERENCES by FlA & Co.

(1) Sorry, Charlie. This is Michael Vickers War
Washington Post by Ann Scott Tyson
December 28, 2007

(2) Shortly after the April 22, 2004 release of the book “Charlie Wilson's War: The Extraordinary Story of How the Wildest Man in Congress and a Rogue CIA Agent Changed the History of Our Times” by the late George Crile, Tom Hanks paid $1,000, 000 for the book’s movie rights. This was Crile's second book on this specific subject. His first book "My Enemy's Enemy: The Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History. The Arming of the Mujahide (published June 12, 2003), was a major failure in public interest and sales. It has no reviews on Amazon.com and only one review on Amazon.co.uk from a former Russian Airborne solider would fought in the Afghanistan war two years, 1984-85, - read * Here *.

From NYT Movie Review: Tom Hanks said he and executives at Universal Pictures fear that "Charlie Wilson's War," would be a dud when it opened. "There's people at the studio, of course, who are losing sleep over it," Mr. Hanks said, neglecting to mention that his own company acquired the project and produced the film with Universal. "There's a possibility that this movie does absolutely nothing. None whatsoever."

Translated – Tom Hanks, received his money up-front from Universal Pictures (NBC-Universal) when his group sold them a turn-key package to produce the movie. Tom didn’t take revenue points on the backend of the deal. He could care less if the movie bombs. Charlie Wilson’s War must have a helluva front-end load because it’s reported breakeven is $153.1 million before it earns a dime. This is extremely unusual for a (George Soros Shadow Party company) Participant Productions produced movie. It’s the highest of any movie they have produced since being founded. All ultra liberal Tom “Never donated a dime to a Republican” Hank’s has to make sure of is that he pays(paid) 15% of his highly inflated loot received from Universal to his Shadow Party Mob Boss, Hungarian George Soros.

(3) Sunday, Dec. 30, 2007 - New York Times Best-Sellers List, Category: Paperback Non-Fiction, #10 Charlie Wilson's War by George Crile (Grove, $14.95; $14). A chronicle, by a veteran producer for "60 Minutes," of a congressman's efforts in the 1980s to steer billions to the anti-Soviet side in Afghanistan. <> Sun., Dec. 16, 2007, the book was #3 on the Best-Seller List.

NOTE: This book belongs in the fiction (drama) section, not the non-fiction section, due to the many liberties, distortions, and flat out lies by ultra liberal Democrat author George Crile. During Crile’s life, he never donated a dime to a Republican (per public records) and refused to ever give a Republican positive credit for anything. In a CBS interview “Rep. Charlie Wilson's Cold War in Afghanistan”, “Charlie Wilson's War” book author George Crile discussed how it was Charlie, not President Ronald Reagan, that beat the Soviets in Afghanistan. Crile also refused to give conservative Republican Joanne Herring proper credit in Charlie Wilson’s War and negatively distorted a number of issues about her involvement - with more than a few flat out lies - in his book. From watching a number of Crile’s interviews about Charlie, it is obvious that George was completely obsessed with Charlie Wilson to a point that it was very strange. It’s interesting that in 1980, CBS did a documentary on the Buena Vista sex park in San Francisco, called Gay Power, Gay Politics. Its CBS producer-reporter was George Crile. Of course, all the aforementioned is only the writer’s personal opinion - and nothing more - as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many other Federal and States’ laws.

(4) Socialite Joanne Herring wins War
The New York Daily News by Rush & Molloy
Wed, December 12, 2007

(5) 12.28.07: If you happened to see Charlie Wilson's War yesterday you no doubt noticed an odd historical parallel: Julia Roberts as right-wing Texas socialite (Joanne Herring) earnestly defending a sitting Pakistani president who doubles as a general and took power in a coup—and is accused of killing a Bhutto - - " [President] Zia did not kill Bhutto", Herring proclaimed. She's referring, of course, to Benazir's father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was hanged by after being overthrown in a military coup. It's in the book too, but seeing it onscreen yesterday made everyone in the theater sit up a little straighter. - http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/7507

(6) Sex! Drugs! (And Maybe a Little War)
The New York Times by Richard Berke
December 16, 2007
- - Excellent movie review and article

Photo: A train burned by rioters in the wake of Benazir Bhutto's assassination stands behind a billboard of the popular leader; photo by John Moore/Getty Images

# # #

Received this via email but have not had an opportunity to review.

Book Review: Charlie Wilson's Betrayal
World in Conflict, by Danius Maximus
PublicGood.org - A volunteer network of researchers, analysts, and activists
- - engaged in defending democracy
June 2, 2004

The real story of the book “Charlie Wilson’s War” has been overlooked, to say the least. It is one of those remarkable books that after you have finished reading it, you know less than before you started. The entire function of the book is to make the American public less informed than ever about how we threw ourselves over the cliff of the Cold War and into the chasm of the War on Terrorism. By the time the movie version starring Tom Hanks has been through the theaters, the process of turning history into fiction will be complete.

Posted for FlAttorney by MAR

Documentary: The True Story Of Charlie Wilson

Released: December 22, 2007
History Channel: http://www.history.com/shows.do?episodeId=254862&action=detail
HC Purchase DVD(s): http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=108800
HC Charlie Wilson related DVDs:
http://store.aetv.com/html/subject/index.jhtml?id=cat2870002&parentcatid=cat2870002

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1129393/
Free Republic: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1943083/posts

Amazon.com: The True Story Of Charlie Wilson
Studio: A & E Home Video
DVD Release Date: March 25, 2008
Run Time: 94 minutes
http://www.amazon.com/True-Story-Charlie-Wilson/dp/B000ZDQI9E

Writer: Aaron Bowden - http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1651862/

Production Company and Distributor: Wild Eyes Production
- Production Company – filmography
http://www.imdb.com/company/co0101064/

The True Story of Charlie Wilson (2007) (TV) ... Production Company
Stalking Jihad (2007) ... Production Company
Inside Al Qaeda (2007) (TV) ... Production Company
Inside the Taliban (2007) (TV) ... Production Company
The True Story of Che Guevara (2007) (TV) ... Production Company
Guests of the Ayatollah (2006) (TV) ... Production Company
Critical Threat: Life in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (2006) (TV) ... Production Company
Skeletons on the Zahara (2006) (TV) ... Production Company
"Heroes Under Fire" (2005) ... Production Company
The Mystery of the Afghan Gold (2005) (TV) ... Production Company
The Dark Art of Interrogation (2005) (TV) ... Production Company
True Warriors: Urgent Fury (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
Targeted: Baby Faced Psycho (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
Targeted: Pineapple Face (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
Targeted: Engineer of Death (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
Targeted: The Evil Genius (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
The Making of the Rose Parade 2005 (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
Targeted: Osama Bin Laden (2004) (TV) ... Production Company
The True Story of Blackhawk Down (2003) (TV) ... Production Company
The True Story of Killing Pablo (2002) (TV) ... Production Company

Posted for FlAttorney by TAB

. . . . below is Jack’s companion article hereinafter referenced – 12.27.07, FlA

Charlie Wilson and Ronald Reagan’s War by Dr. Jack Wheeler
Thursday, 27 December 2007

10.08.01: Gulbuddin and the CIA, D.J.W. - - As many recent commentaries have noted, there was no unified command of Afghan "Mujahaddin" freedom fighters resisting the Soviet occupation of their country in the 1980s. There were about half a dozen major groups and a host of smaller ones. The legendary commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, assassinated by OBL (Osama Bin Laden) agents just before The Atrocity, belonged to the "Jamiat" group led by Burhanuddin Rabbani. Qari Baba, the famous commander in Ghazni who looked like a cross between Buddha and Genghiz Khan, was part of the Harakat group. Ramatullah Safi was the most outstanding commander of the Gailani group. Abdul Haq was the same for the Younis Khalis group. With one exception, all of these groups and commanders pretty much cooperated with each other. Their political leaders met and worked together (I attended some of their meetings), their commanders and bands of fighters did the same (which I witnessed in the field). Rarely did they fight amongst themselves, but focused instead on their common enemy, the Shuravi -- Afghan for Soviet Russians.

The exception was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, leader of the "Hezbis." I went inside Afghanistan with every major Mujahaddin group - except for the Hezbis. I met Gulbuddin and interviewed him in August 1984 - and found him to be an Islamic Fascist, an admirer of the Ayatollah Khomeini, and a hater of America. Everywhere I went inside Afghanistan in the 1980s, the story was always the same: the Hezbis spent their time fighting other Mujahaddin groups for turf instead of the Shuravi. Rather than fight for the freedom of Afghanistan, Gulbuddin hoarded his weapons, planning a takeover of his country once the other Mujahaddin had liberated it for him.

It may -- or it may not -- come as a surprise to learn that the CIA was obsessively insistent that the lion's share of arms and support they gave to the Afghan Mujahaddin went to Gulbuddin. The term "obsessive" is in no way hyperbolic. The CIA's obsession to support Gulbuddin in vast preference to all other Mujahaddin leaders bordered on the pathological. Every CIA agent I ever talked to -- especially the armchair analysts at Langley - - was insufferably condescending whenever I would state that Gulbuddin's people did no fighting, that the other groups were begging for weapons while the Hezbis had an oversupply of weapons they didn't use. The agents would patronizingly assure me their "intel" contradicted what I and every other independent observer who actually went into Afghanistan saw with our own eyes - - so we all must be wrong.

A number of United States Congressmen also had figured out that the CIA was lying about Gulbuddin's effectiveness, and were well aware of the great danger he was to the future of Afghanistan. I once delivered a personally written note from one such Congressman (Charlie Wilson - FlA) to Burhanuddin Rabbani.(1) We had met a number of times before, but on this occasion we had a long discussion. The note was an explicit request for Rabbani to have his people spare no effort to assassinate Gulbuddin. "If you do not do this," I explained to Rabbani and his chief aide, "Engineer" Abdul Rahim, "any victory the Afghans achieve over the Shuravi will result in chaos and disaster. Gulbuddin has to be killed, killed dead, if Afghanistan is to have any future and any freedom." After our discussion, the Congressman's letter, of which no copies were made, was burned before my eyes. A few days later, Gulbuddin's Toyota Land Cruiser blew up in Peshawar, Pakistan. Gulbuddin's driver was killed, but Gulbuddin, although injured, survived. Subsequent attempts also failed.

When the Shuravi were forced to retreat in defeat in February, 1989, freedom for Afghanistan seemed clearly on the horizon. Yet right on schedule, Gulbuddin began his war for power. While Rabbani, as leader of the strongest and best organized freedom fighter group, attempted to put together a coherent government in Kabul, Gulbuddin began shelling the city. The CIA and their Pakistan counterpart, the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) forced Rabbani to accept a coalition government with Gulbuddin as Prime Minister, and with it, the resignation of Massoud as his Defense Minister. Massoud's departure as Defense Minister precipitated Afghanistan's collapse into the utter chaos that made the Taliban possible.

Afghanistan, it must be understood, is an artificially created country, an ethnic hodge-podge glued together for the purpose of keeping the British Raj and the Russian Empire apart and not touching. Look at the map and you'll see this narrow sliver of Afghan territory, the "Wakhan Corridor," on the top right corner that goes all the way to China, barely separating what is now Tadjikistan (but in the late 1800s Russian Central Asia) and what is now Pakistan (but then British India).

Pakistan is similarly artificial, another ethnic stir-fry created as a refuge for Indian Moslems who didn't want to be ruled by Indian Hindus (who outnumbered them 2-to-1) when India got its independence after WWII.

North of the Hindu Kush mountains in Afghanistan, the ethnic majorities are Tadjik and Uzbek. South the main tribe is the Pushtuns. Pakistan is composed of Baluchi nomads in its south western deserts bordering Iran, Sindhis in the southern Indus region, Punjabis in the central Indus - and along the border with Afghanistan it's all Pushtun. The Pak government has never exercised true sovereignty over the Pushtun area, known as the NWFA (North West Frontier Agency), and has always been terrified of the demand for an independent "Pushtunistan" breaking Pakistan apart.

It was this fear that caused the Paks to freak out when Afghanistan went completely anarchic. Gulbuddin was their Pushtun guy. The Tadjiks -- Rabbani and Massoud - - were out. The Paks had gotten their wish and the Chinese proverb about being careful for what you wished for had become nightmarishly apropos. In desperation, they turned to a group of nutcase fanatics calling themselves "students" ("Taliban") although most of them were thoroughly illiterate. The ISI saw an opportunity for a business relationship in the bargain - - a joint venture to operate the heroin business.

Sixty percent of the world's heroin comes out of Afghanistan. That only happens with the full cooperation of the governments involved -- in this case the Taliban government in Afghanistan and the ISI "government within a government" in Pakistan. With the money from the heroin trade, the Taliban were able to bribe opposing commanders and proceeded to take over the country with hardly a battle. Only Massoud resisted. The Taliban chased Gulbuddin out of Kabul and into exile with his Islamic Fascist friends in Iran.

The point to all of this history is that the CIA’s buddy Gulbuddin has publicly announced - on September 18, one week after The Atrocity - his support for Osama Bin Laden and his intention to return to Afghanistan to join Al Qaeda. The CIA owes Afghanistan an abject apology for its disgraceful support of this evil man. Were it not for this support, Afghanistan would have had a chance to stabilize in the 1990s, the Taliban would have not come to power, Al Qaeda would not have established a sanctuary under Taliban protection, and given that, The Atrocity of September 11 might never have occurred.
------------

Footnote by FlA & Co.

(1) Whenever I (Dr. Jack Wheeler) came back from Afghanistan throughout the 1980s, along with various people in the Reagan White House, the Pentagon and Congress, I would always brief Charlie Wilson. My years of ranting at him about Gulbuddin finally got through to him in early 1987 – because it wasn't just me. "Why do you and everyone else who's been inside [Afghanistan] tell me one thing, and the same thing, about the Hezbis, while the CIA tells me the opposite?" he mused. “Because the CIA is lying to you, Charlie," I replied. "What do you suggest?" he asked. After a discussion, he took out a piece of paper, wrote a letter, put it in an envelope and said, "Take this to Rabbani." Burhanuddin Rabbani was the leader of the Jamiat mujahedeen, ones who did a lot of the fighting. Massoud was a Jamiat commander.

It wasn't long before I was in Islamabad to hand Rabbani the letter. Its contents can be surmised from this excerpt from "Gulbuddin and the CIA," which at the time could not mention any names. A number of United States congressmen also had figured out that the CIA was lying about Gulbuddin's effectiveness, and were well aware of the great danger he was to the future of Afghanistan. I once delivered a personally written note from one such congressman to Burhanuddin Rabbani. We had met a number of times before, but on this occasion we had a long discussion. The note was an explicit request for Rabbani to have his people spare no effort to assassinate Gulbuddin. "If you do not do this," I explained to Rabbani and his chief aide, Abdul Rahim, "any victory the Afghans achieve over the Shuravi [Soviets] will result in chaos and disaster. Gulbuddin has to be killed, killed dead, if Afghanistan is to have any future and any freedom."

After our discussion, the congressman's letter, of which no copies were made, was burned before my eyes. A few days later, Gulbuddin's Toyota Land Cruiser blew up in Peshawar, Pakistan. Gulbuddin's driver was killed, but Gulbuddin, although injured, survived. Subsequent attempts also failed. If Crile had written more of the truth, it would have made a better book and movie. The same goes for the crux of the plot, providing the mujahedeen with Stinger missiles.

# # #

Tom Hanks Tells Hollywood Whopper in 'Charlie Wilson's War'
By Melissa Roddy, AlterNet
December 21, 2007
- - Alternet is an anti right-wing news organization. Interesting this article appeared on their site. - FlA

Posted for FlAttorney by TAB

If Crile had written more of the truth, it would have made a better book and movie. The same goes for the crux of the plot, providing the mujahedeen with Stinger missiles.

If George Crile "had written more of the truth", any more of the truth, book wouldn't sell many copies and we wouldn't see the movie adapted from it because Hollywood (in this case Tom Hanks, Aaron Sorkin, George Soros et al,) as Aaron Sorkin said in his other script, "can't handle the truth", and wouldn't be interested in making, producing and financing the truth and nothing but the truth.

In his fictional story, "based on a true story", Grile used just enough of the truth to make a "hero" out of a personally flawed southern Democrat (oh, what parallels one can draw!), while at the same time subtly implying that Reagan and his administration were somehow responsible for bad guys (Gulbuddin, Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden et al) organizing and being financed and supplied by us in Afghanistan, which later (around 1995) led to takeover by Taliban and still later (around 1998) let to Osama's relocation of al-Qaeda HQ and training camps in Afghanistan...

The inconvenient truth is that because Charlie Wilson was deeply personally flawed and in constant danger of losing his office and, therefore, his meal ticket to power, women, junkets and possibly even his own freedom were constantly in jeopardy, he could easily be blackmailed and used and was used by CIA, Pakis and Afghans nd whoever else - for deeds, some good and some evil, by people, some good and some evil.

That's the real inconvenient truth about Charlie Wilson, but it wouldn't be easy to find in Charlie Wilson's War as told to us (even when modified under pressure) by George Grile, Aaron Sorkin, Tom Hanks and George Soros, because it wasn't his "war" - Charlie Wilson happened to be the right guy ("personally flawed") in the right place (Congress, where funding authority lies for covert operations) at the right time (Afghanistan's mujahideen resistance against Soviet invasion) who was taken along for the ride because he was useful in getting funding for it.

In Hollywood, when the story doesn't fit or doesn't sell, they do a rewrite... After almost two decades, that it's no longer possible to keep silent, deny or diminish the fact that Soviet Union's defeat in Afghanistan was a huge step in the dissolution of Evil Empire, so the need for a new story line and a "real hero" somehow suddenly emerged from fertile imagination of Hollywood liberals. What we are witnessing here is another one of Hollywood's rewrites of history. If the choice is between telling the truth or telling the story, when the story sounds better than the truth, Hollywood (and many "journalists") will tell the story.

Sorry, Charlie... You couldn't win "Charlie Wilson's War" as there was no such thing, except in the hearts and minds of Hollywood.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.