COVERUP: AFGHANS AND DRUG PROFITS

At the end of this article is an even more important reason to bring our troops home now; if you skip the first part, please read the end!

Insider attacks against coalition soldiers by Afghan security forces, called “green on blue” is worse than what’s being reported.  The Pentagon has covered up the full extent of the treachery.  It’s not bad enough that it’s hard to tell who the enemy is, now they’re standing in back of as if they’re friends!

On Monday, NATO reported that yet another uniformed Afghan soldier murdered
two more coalition soldiers, bringing the official count to 77.  The actual figure may be more than double.

The Pentagon has made it look as if a number of American victims of insider attacks died while fighting in combat.

Take the case of Marine Lance Cpl. Edward J. Dycus, who died Feb. 1 from a
gunshot wound while serving in Afghanistan. In the official announcement of
his death, the Pentagon said Dycus died “while conducting combat operations.”
But further investigation reveals an Afghan soldier shot the 22-year-old
Marine in the back of the head while standing guard at Afghan-U.S. base in
southwest Afghanistan.  The Defense Department made no mention of the
treachery in the public notice it released.

More disturbing, U.S. commanders turned the Afghan suspect over to Afghan
government custody.  How many other fraggers have been turned over to
Afghans?  Have they been released from custody?

Since that insider attack, six other U.S. soldiers have been ambushed and
killed by their Afghan partners in separate attacks.  In each case, the
Pentagon failed to report in its official casualty announcement reviewed by
IBD that the Americans were killed after Afghan security forces turned their
weapons on our patriots.

How many other “combat deaths” have, in fact, been caused by insider
attacks?  By the count of respected military blogger Michael Yon, U.S.-led
coalition forces have taken about 200 casualties from insider attacks by
Afghans since Operation Enduring Freedom began.  More than three-fourths of
the attacks have occurred in the past two years.

Right out front, this stinks. For the military brass to cover up such growing treachery on the part of our supposed ally . . .

I’ll ask you, my reader; don’t you suspect this was ordered to be covered up . . . . by politicials? 

An even bigger potential cover-up though?  Keep reading.

The success of President Obama’s exit strategy hinges on the partnership
between coalition forces and Afghan forces.  Standing up an Afghan army is
key to leaving, but to tell our enemy when we’re leaving is endangering their lives.  But this strategy is threatened by the rising number of  Afghan army soldiers and police who are turning their guns on their “infidel” partners.

Internally, the military has acknowledged that this is a bigger problem than the administration has let on. And it has been going on long before the recent Quran burnings or massacre of 17 Afghan civilians.

A May 2011 study commissioned by the Army says “fratricidal” assaults by uniformed Afghans are no longer isolated and are “provoking a crisis of confidence and trust among Westerners training and working with the ANSFs  (Afghan National Security Forces).”

The report said Afghans viewed coalition troops as “infidel bullies hiding behind high technology,” while coalition forces regarded their counterparts as “treacherous and murderous radicals” secretly colluding with the Taliban.

A parallel cover-up involves the treachery of Afghan civilians working around NATO bases.  They too increasingly are ambushing U.S. and NATO soldiers.

Last month, an Afghan literacy teacher working inside a forward operating base near Kandahar helped kill two American soldiers.  Earlier this month, an Afghan civilian interpreter at a British base in Helmand province stole a coalition pickup truck and tried to mow down a group of U.S. Marines.

And it was an Afghan civilian worker who sparked rioting against U.S. troops over the burning of Qu’rans, which the military destroyed because they contained covert messages from terrorist detainees held at Bagram Air Field.

The 22-year-old Afghan, who is employed by the base, discovered the charred Muslim holy books in a pit and gathered them up and paraded them through the local streets in an attempt to cause violence.

Protecting our U.S. forces should be priority No. 1. Yet the Pentagon seems more
concerned with protecting the tenuous Afghan training partnership, the
president’s exit strategy . . . and don’t forget . . .

• President Obama is the puppet of George Soros whose goal, over the last three decades, has been to legalize drugs.
• President Karazai’s brother is the number 1 smuggler of heroin, and hashish from Afghanistan.
• The profits from these drugs, also supplies Al-Quaeda and Taliban troops.
• Our soldiers walk alongside the poppy fields, ordered to not disturb them, nor going after the connected drug smuggler.
• WHY?   We’re told, as an excuse, that it would disrupt their economy to eliminate the drugs which supply the entire world.

To a former Chicagoan, this sounds too typical of Chicago-type politics!  

In fact, thinking about it, . . . this sounds like an even more high-profile COVERUP!   I wonder what size kickbacks could be to people on such a level and I wonder, ‘are they really that dirty’! I sure don’t trust them!

(Note: I’m not suggesting military brass would be part of this, but sometimes, . . . their loyalty can be misplaced (not thought out) when they know of it.)