Brian Ross (disclaimer: often, what we learn from Ross is what the CIA wants us to know, search on “Brian Ross” “anthrax” and “Glenn Greenwald” for details) reports that the US has categorically rejected the concept of trading Aafia Siddiqui for Raymond Davis. At the same time, BBC provides a very interesting background piece on the Davis affair, in which they describe the agendas of various government and non-government entities involved in the legal and political conflict that has arisen from the case. Buried in that description, however, is a very interesting report that the uncle of the widow who committed suicide out of remorse that her husband’s killer would never face judgment now reports that he was attacked by two men who tried to force rat poison down his throat. Possibly (but not necessarily) related is a new report in the New York Times letting us know that Dewey Clarridge’s shadowy group has not yet been disbanded and has been doing work for the FBI. Finally, we also learn from Dawn that at least 45 people whose contact information was in Davis’ cell phone have been arrested.

In a meeting Sunday at the presidential palace in Kabul to investigate reports of multiple civilian deaths in a US operation in Konar province, General David Petraeus deeply offended those present when he suggested that Afghan civilians had deliberately burned their children in an effort to blame US attacks for their injuries. Rear Admiral Gregory J. Smith, the top military spokesperson in Kabul, then provided a statement to the Washington Post suggesting that the burns were inflicted on the children as punishment. This development is remarkably similar to events last March, when Smith initially stated after Special Forces killed two pregnant women in a night raid that the women had been slashed to death by knives before the raid took place, only for a later investigation to reveal that the Special Forces soldiers had used knives to remove the bullets that they had fired into the women.

Despite a propaganda buildup that began last weekend, with both General David Petraeus and NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen making claims of regaining momentum against the Taliban in the Kandahar offensive, Wednesday’s Washington Post destroys those claims with the headline that “U.S. military campaign to topple resilient Taliban hasn’t succeeded“. As if the destruction of Petraeus’ propaganda offensive by the Post is not enough on its own, BBC chimes in Wednesday, as well, with a fresh quote from Mikhail Gorbachev that victory in Afghanistan is impossible.

Wikileaks releases 91,737 US military files documenting all aspects of the Afghan war and occupation. From new information about allies to detailed info on unreported civilian killings and Special Ops assassination teams, the release is unprecedented and shows how very futile this continuing war really is.

What does the story of a night raid in Wardak province tell us about the consequences of our war in Afghanistan?

Are we preparing for an American invasion of Pakistan’s tribal regions? Actions by the Pakistani military, comments from the intelligence community, and even the White House response to new terror attacks seem to suggest these preparations are already under way. And no good can come of it.

At the same time Gen Petraeus meets with Wali Karzai, Afghan prosecutor accuses US Special Forces of running an “outlaw militia” backed by Karzai and issues arrest warrant for a US Special Ops commander

If you have a much better memory than most of our media, you may remember the really big – in fact “decisive” – battle the US announced for the important Afghan city … oops, village … oh pardon me, collection of farms called Marja. Complete with a planned “government in a box,” Gen. McChrystal’s always [...]

Obama will not withdraw US Special Forces from Iraq when “all combat forces” leave this summer and Gen. McChrystal, who keeps claiming to be getting control over SOF and civilian casualties, has had command over them all along.

Scott Shane’s new article in the New York Times on the background to the Mitchell-Jessen story may work as a prosecutorial brief, but it presents a narrative about the origins of the SERE-inspired torture program that is misleading in its particulars. As a result, though the article has some interesting new bits of information, and appears to be the result of a great deal of work, it presents an overly simplistic