ISI operatives in the media in Pakistan have been busy making noises in an attempt to make Pakistanis, at least, believe that the US is actually cornering Musharraf. They blame human rights organizations, NGOs, lawyers and all other critics of the regime to be working for the US and serving interests of Indian intelligence agency RAW.
They base their disinformation campaign on the following points:
- Musharraf does not fit well with Washington’s agenda. 
- Musharraf is the target because he refuses to play ball with the US on Afghanistan, China and Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan. 
- Washington is annoyed with Musharraf because he did not hand over Osama to the U.S.
- Musharraf did not send troops to Iraq because of which Turkey also refused to join the US forces in Iraq. 
- Musharraf did not recognize Israel. 
- Musharraf has destroyed the US policy. 
- There is carefully crafted anti-Musharraf media blitzkrieg launched early in 2007. 
- The US is pumping money into Pakistan to pay for organized dissent. 
- A campaign is being waged on the Internet where tens of mailing lists and “news agencies” have sprung up from nowhere, all demonizing Musharraf and the Pakistani military. 
- European- and American-funded Pakistani NGOs have started makeshift anti-government mobilization machine. 
- US government agencies are directly funding some private Pakistani television networks; the channels go into an open anti-government mode, cashing in on some manufactured and other real public grievances regarding inflation and corruption. 
- Some of Musharraf’s shady and corrupt political allies are feeding this campaign, hoping to stay in power under a weakened president. 
Some of the absurdities in such argument are obvious. Musharraf did not do some of the job mentioned above simply because he could not. Musharraf didn’t hand over Osama, not because he didn’t want to but because of many other possible reasons, including the possibility that he is not even alive.
Similarly, not sending troops to Iraq and not recognizing Israel were absolutely beyond his dictatorial control. He wouldn’t be there where he is today, if he had done so besides the long list of his other crimes against the nation. Musharraf and his masters knew that well.
Similarly, there are factual errors in the statements of these ISI puppets on the show. It is not that Turkey refused to send troops before Pakistan did. Being a neighbour and having a stake in the Kurdistan, Turkey was the first country consulted and was the first to refuse. Turkey said no to the US in November 2003. Pakistan did so in August 2004.
Musharraf did not destroy the US policy. Pakistani would feel better off with a straight forward loser than a crooked winner. If Mush has destroyed the US or its foreign policy, so be it. We are not interested in destruction of the United States. Pakistanis just don’t want it in their back yard and for that they need someone straight forward who would not cheat the US and deceive the public at the same time.
To further support these points the military appointed civilian analysts claim that when the judicial crisis broke out, “even Pakistani politicians were surprised at a well-greased and well-organized lawyers’ campaign, complete with flyers, rented cars and buses, excellent event-management and media outreach.” So the reaction to Musharraf’s blunder of removing the Chief justice is conveniently blame on the United States.
The ISI-backed analysts are given the responsibility to play anchor roles in current affairs programs on Pakistan Television. Ahmad Qureshi is one of them and one of his regular guests is Mr. Ahid Hamid. Together they propagate lies, alleging that students are being recruited and organized into a street movement.
Ahmad Qureshi wrote in an article that the regime in Islamabad is sitting on a “pile of evidence” to prove that Afghanistan and India provided military equipment to Akbar Bugti through Karzai regime in Afghanistan. He called Bugti “a smalltime village thug.” The question is: why is the regime sitting on this evidence? Why is it not making even a quarter as much noise as Karzai is making about the Pakistani support for anti-regime attacks in Afghanistan? The fact is that the regime in Islamabad has no evidence for this except the word of mouth by the ISI-backed-analysts. So, with these points the analysts on ISI pay role are trying to tell Pakistanis that the US is in fact against Musharraf.
The ISI operatives blame reaction of the deprived Baluchis on India and Afghanistan, and indirectly on the United States with the conjecture that the Baluchis are engaged in anti-state activities to sour Pakistan-China relation. Ahmad Qureshi points in one of his article that Bugti’s rebellion coincided with the Gwadar project entering into its final stages. “Bugti’s real job was to scare the Chinese away and scuttle Chinese President Hu Jintao’s planned visit to Gwadar a few months later to formally launch the port city,” he argues. The problem with this conjecture is that the problem in Baluchistan is not new. Baluchistan and NWFo have been treated discriminately and disproportionately since long. The resistance and reaction there is decades old. It has nothing to do with Gwadar and the supposed US mission to overthrow Musharraf.
Propagation of nonsense by the ISI-operative starts crossing limits at a point when they blame the resistance to Pakistan’s military operations in the tribal areas on the United States as well.
In one of his articles, Ahmad Qureshi attempts to convince his readers that it is actually the United States which recruited Abdullah Mehsud as a replacement to Bugti. The ISI’s fairy tale goes somewhat like this:
” United States intelligence and their Indian advisors could not cultivate an immediate replacement for Bugti. So they moved to Plan B. They supported Abdullah Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban fighter held for five years in Guantanamo Bay, and then handed him over back to the Afghan government, only to return to his homeland, Pakistan, to kidnap two Chinese engineers working in Balochistan, one of whom was eventually killed during a rescue operation by the Pakistani government.” 
Everyone know that Musharraf could take a stand on principles after 9/11. He could have refused military assistance to the US for its invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. To neutralise that strategic blunder, the ISI operatives are trying to present Pakistan and Pakistan army as a target of the US aggression. Of course they are the primary targets of the US. But Musharraf definitely is not. To indirectly generate sympathies for Musharraf, the ISI analysis try to explain how Pakistan military is being strategically sabotaged, forgetting the fact that this has nothing to do with the US plans against Musharraf because Musharraf is the key facilitators of all anti-Pakistan plans by the neocons and warlords in Washington.
We have been pointing it out since day one of the Mush’s surrender to the US. It is an exercise in futility by the ISI to hide Musharraf behind the heat that has gradually been turned op against Pakistan and its military by the United States. Musharraf is not a victim in this case. He is a culprit. Let us assume for a minute that Bugti family is being financed by the US to undermine Pakistan and his grandson, Brahmdagh Bugti, is currently enjoying a safe shelter in the Afghan capital, Kabul, where he continues to operate and remote-control his assets in Pakistan. The question is, who is Karzai’s strategic partner? Isn’t it Musharraf who facilitated invasion and occupation of Afghanistan? Isn’t it Musharraf who is fighting enemies of Karzai’s regime? Isn’t it Musharraf who stands shoulder to shoulder with Karzai and grace his illegitimate moves (such as the grand jirgas) with his presence? ISI’s tirade against DC and Kabul fails simply because we don’t see Mush separate from both of them. They are one in all the crimes against humanity in this region since October 7, 2001 in particular.
ISI complains through its puppets in the Pakistani media that saboteurs trained in Afghanistan have been inserted into Pakistan to aggravate extremist passions in Pakistan, especially after the Red Mosque operation. There are no saboteurs from Afghanistan as the regime in Islamabad has made no public claim about it, let alone presenting some evidence to support these stories from the ISI.
Of course, Chinese citizens continue to be targeted by individuals pretending to be related to groups related with Islamic movement, when no known Islamic group has claimed responsibility. Of course, there are operations going on in Pakistan to destabilize it in different ways. However, Musharraf doesn’t deserve any kind of support because of that. The reason is that these operations are on, not because he is not appreciated by the US in the position of power, but simply because he is there to muddy the waters to the masses within and analysts abroad. With the Musharraf regime propaganda about “Islamic extremism,” it is not hard for the outsiders to use their agents as “religious rebels” for creating mischief. However, the ISI attempt to parade Abdul Rashid Ghazi, Baitullah Mehsud, and the Maulana of Swat as ISI agents just doesn’t hold water.
The ISI-backed “analysts” also claim that “money and weapons have been fed into the religious movements and al-Qaeda remnants in the tribal areas.” Interestingly, it is only Pakistan’s military that is allowed go erect check posts around the tribal areas, to invade tribal areas, and to do aerial and electronic surveillance in and around the tribal areas. Even journalists are not allowed to venture there. How is the CIA then passing the alleged weapons and money to the al-qaeda remnants in these areas. If Al-Qaeda is in fact fighting for the US against Pakistan, what is all this fuss aboout the "war on terrorism" on the part of Mush and his cronies in Islamabad? Why does Musharraf hand over anyone caught as al-Qaeda fighters back to the CIA? And there are a lot more questions that simply turn such assertions by the ISI through its puppet totally on their head.
The bottom-line is that Pakistan army has been a target since long. For that the US has been using and supporting Musharraf, not undermining him as long as he remains the most obedient slave. Musharraf is not a victim of US aggression in the region; he is the prime facilitator.
Notes:. url: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7709
. url: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=