SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
In the early morning of Saturday, November 26, 2011 two US Apache helicopters, an AC-130 gunship, and a number of fighter jets launched a sustained and deadly attack on two Pakistani army border posts near Salala, on the Afghan-Pakistan border. The American airstrikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
US/Pakistan Talks Fail as Obama Refuses to Apologize for Attack
Apr 28, 2012
The New York Times is reporting today that high-level talks designed to end a diplomatic deadlock between the U.S. and Pakistan ended in failure Friday night because the Obama administration is refusing to apologize for US attacks last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
Because the U.S. has refused to apologize for the attack, Pakistan has retaliated by cutting off NATO supply routes to Afghanistan. In return, the U.S. is withholding as much as $3 billion of promised military aid.
The DAWN newspaper of Pakistan reports that instead of apologizing, the Americans want Pakistan to settle for invitation to the Chicago NATO Summit in return for the reopening of ground supply routes.
* * *
The New York Times reports:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- The first concentrated high-level talks aimed at breaking a five-month diplomatic deadlock between the United States and Pakistan ended in failure on Friday over Pakistani demands for an unconditional apology from the Obama administration for an airstrike. The White House, angered by the recent spectacular Taliban attacks in Afghanistan, refuses to apologize.
The Obama administration's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, left the Pakistani capital Friday night with no agreement after two days of discussions aimed at patching up the damage caused by the American airstrikes last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghanistan border. [...]
The negotiations are complicated by a complex web of interlocking demands from both sides. Without the apology, Pakistani officials say they cannot reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan that have been closed since November.
The Americans, in turn, are withholding between $1.18 billion and $3 billion of promised military aid -- the exact figure depending on which side is speaking.
The continuing deadlock does not bode well for Pakistan's attendance at a NATO meeting in Chicago in three weeks, assuming it is even invited. The administration has been eager to cast the event as a regional security summit meeting, and Pakistan's absence would be embarrassing.
* * *
DAWN of Pakistan reports:
[...] Instead of apologizing, the Americans want Pakistan to settle for invitation to (NATO) Chicago Summit in return for the reopening of ground supply routes.
"The US has also reneged on its commitment to apologize for the Salala incident. The US, officials said, had communicated to Pakistan during the London meeting between Secretary of States Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar that both civilian and military leadership would apologize."Other officials engaged in dialogue with the US for rebooting ties also said that the US reluctance to apologize had stymied the normalization process and the first round of talks in Islamabad ended without making any headway.
The Nov 26 attack on the Salala post threw Pakistan-US ties, which had already been weighed down by the challenging events of 2011, into a tailspin and Pakistan reacted by ordering revision of terms of engagement with Washington, suspending NATO supply routes and evicting the Americans from the Shamsi airbase.
On completion of a protracted review process, parliament sought apology and punishment for those responsible for the deadly strike in addition to other demands, including cessation of drone attacks and cutting down American footprint in Pakistan.
The US has already refused to negotiate on drone strikes, leaving Pakistan to push for alternatives that could at least satisfy its sovereignty concerns.
President Zardari made mention of this during his meeting and said: "Drone attacks are highly counter-productive in the war against militants ... both sides should consider setting up a framework of mechanism to find mutually acceptable alternatives."
The US has also reneged on its commitment to apologize for the Salala incident. The US, officials said, had communicated to Pakistan during the London meeting between Secretary of States Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar that both civilian and military leadership would apologize. Gen Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was to apologize on behalf of the military and Secretary Clinton on behalf of the political leadership.
But that couldn't happen for a variety of reasons, chiefly President Barack Obama's domestic political compulsions.
* * *
# # #
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The New York Times is reporting today that high-level talks designed to end a diplomatic deadlock between the U.S. and Pakistan ended in failure Friday night because the Obama administration is refusing to apologize for US attacks last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
Because the U.S. has refused to apologize for the attack, Pakistan has retaliated by cutting off NATO supply routes to Afghanistan. In return, the U.S. is withholding as much as $3 billion of promised military aid.
The DAWN newspaper of Pakistan reports that instead of apologizing, the Americans want Pakistan to settle for invitation to the Chicago NATO Summit in return for the reopening of ground supply routes.
* * *
The New York Times reports:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- The first concentrated high-level talks aimed at breaking a five-month diplomatic deadlock between the United States and Pakistan ended in failure on Friday over Pakistani demands for an unconditional apology from the Obama administration for an airstrike. The White House, angered by the recent spectacular Taliban attacks in Afghanistan, refuses to apologize.
The Obama administration's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, left the Pakistani capital Friday night with no agreement after two days of discussions aimed at patching up the damage caused by the American airstrikes last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghanistan border. [...]
The negotiations are complicated by a complex web of interlocking demands from both sides. Without the apology, Pakistani officials say they cannot reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan that have been closed since November.
The Americans, in turn, are withholding between $1.18 billion and $3 billion of promised military aid -- the exact figure depending on which side is speaking.
The continuing deadlock does not bode well for Pakistan's attendance at a NATO meeting in Chicago in three weeks, assuming it is even invited. The administration has been eager to cast the event as a regional security summit meeting, and Pakistan's absence would be embarrassing.
* * *
DAWN of Pakistan reports:
[...] Instead of apologizing, the Americans want Pakistan to settle for invitation to (NATO) Chicago Summit in return for the reopening of ground supply routes.
"The US has also reneged on its commitment to apologize for the Salala incident. The US, officials said, had communicated to Pakistan during the London meeting between Secretary of States Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar that both civilian and military leadership would apologize."Other officials engaged in dialogue with the US for rebooting ties also said that the US reluctance to apologize had stymied the normalization process and the first round of talks in Islamabad ended without making any headway.
The Nov 26 attack on the Salala post threw Pakistan-US ties, which had already been weighed down by the challenging events of 2011, into a tailspin and Pakistan reacted by ordering revision of terms of engagement with Washington, suspending NATO supply routes and evicting the Americans from the Shamsi airbase.
On completion of a protracted review process, parliament sought apology and punishment for those responsible for the deadly strike in addition to other demands, including cessation of drone attacks and cutting down American footprint in Pakistan.
The US has already refused to negotiate on drone strikes, leaving Pakistan to push for alternatives that could at least satisfy its sovereignty concerns.
President Zardari made mention of this during his meeting and said: "Drone attacks are highly counter-productive in the war against militants ... both sides should consider setting up a framework of mechanism to find mutually acceptable alternatives."
The US has also reneged on its commitment to apologize for the Salala incident. The US, officials said, had communicated to Pakistan during the London meeting between Secretary of States Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar that both civilian and military leadership would apologize. Gen Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was to apologize on behalf of the military and Secretary Clinton on behalf of the political leadership.
But that couldn't happen for a variety of reasons, chiefly President Barack Obama's domestic political compulsions.
* * *
# # #
The New York Times is reporting today that high-level talks designed to end a diplomatic deadlock between the U.S. and Pakistan ended in failure Friday night because the Obama administration is refusing to apologize for US attacks last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
Because the U.S. has refused to apologize for the attack, Pakistan has retaliated by cutting off NATO supply routes to Afghanistan. In return, the U.S. is withholding as much as $3 billion of promised military aid.
The DAWN newspaper of Pakistan reports that instead of apologizing, the Americans want Pakistan to settle for invitation to the Chicago NATO Summit in return for the reopening of ground supply routes.
* * *
The New York Times reports:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- The first concentrated high-level talks aimed at breaking a five-month diplomatic deadlock between the United States and Pakistan ended in failure on Friday over Pakistani demands for an unconditional apology from the Obama administration for an airstrike. The White House, angered by the recent spectacular Taliban attacks in Afghanistan, refuses to apologize.
The Obama administration's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, left the Pakistani capital Friday night with no agreement after two days of discussions aimed at patching up the damage caused by the American airstrikes last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghanistan border. [...]
The negotiations are complicated by a complex web of interlocking demands from both sides. Without the apology, Pakistani officials say they cannot reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan that have been closed since November.
The Americans, in turn, are withholding between $1.18 billion and $3 billion of promised military aid -- the exact figure depending on which side is speaking.
The continuing deadlock does not bode well for Pakistan's attendance at a NATO meeting in Chicago in three weeks, assuming it is even invited. The administration has been eager to cast the event as a regional security summit meeting, and Pakistan's absence would be embarrassing.
* * *
DAWN of Pakistan reports:
[...] Instead of apologizing, the Americans want Pakistan to settle for invitation to (NATO) Chicago Summit in return for the reopening of ground supply routes.
"The US has also reneged on its commitment to apologize for the Salala incident. The US, officials said, had communicated to Pakistan during the London meeting between Secretary of States Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar that both civilian and military leadership would apologize."Other officials engaged in dialogue with the US for rebooting ties also said that the US reluctance to apologize had stymied the normalization process and the first round of talks in Islamabad ended without making any headway.
The Nov 26 attack on the Salala post threw Pakistan-US ties, which had already been weighed down by the challenging events of 2011, into a tailspin and Pakistan reacted by ordering revision of terms of engagement with Washington, suspending NATO supply routes and evicting the Americans from the Shamsi airbase.
On completion of a protracted review process, parliament sought apology and punishment for those responsible for the deadly strike in addition to other demands, including cessation of drone attacks and cutting down American footprint in Pakistan.
The US has already refused to negotiate on drone strikes, leaving Pakistan to push for alternatives that could at least satisfy its sovereignty concerns.
President Zardari made mention of this during his meeting and said: "Drone attacks are highly counter-productive in the war against militants ... both sides should consider setting up a framework of mechanism to find mutually acceptable alternatives."
The US has also reneged on its commitment to apologize for the Salala incident. The US, officials said, had communicated to Pakistan during the London meeting between Secretary of States Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar that both civilian and military leadership would apologize. Gen Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was to apologize on behalf of the military and Secretary Clinton on behalf of the political leadership.
But that couldn't happen for a variety of reasons, chiefly President Barack Obama's domestic political compulsions.
* * *
# # #
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
LATEST NEWS
DOJ Sued for Withholding Memo on Trump's $400 Million Jet From Qatar
"President Trump's deal to take a $400 million luxury jet from a foreign government deserves full public scrutiny—not a stiff-arm from the Department of Justice," said the head of one watchdog group.
Jul 28, 2025
With preparations to refit a Qatari jet to be used as Air Force One "underway," a press freedom group sued the U.S. Department of Justice in federal court on Monday for failing to release the DOJ memorandum about the legality of President Donald Trump accepting the $400 million "flying palace."
The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), represented by nonpartisan watchdog American Oversight, filed the lawsuit seeking the memo, which was reportedly approved by the Office of Legal Counsel and signed by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who previously lobbied on behalf of the Qatari government.
FPF had submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the memo on May 15, and the DOJ told the group that fulfilling it would take over 600 days.
"How many flights could Trump have taken on his new plane in the same amount of time it would have taken the DOJ to release this one document?"
"It shouldn't take 620 days to release a single, time-sensitive document," said Lauren Harper, FPF's Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy, in a Monday statement. "How many flights could Trump have taken on his new plane in the same amount of time it would have taken the DOJ to release this one document?"
The complaint—filed in the District of Columbia—notes that the airplane is set to be donated to Trump's private presidential library foundation after his second term. Harper said that "the government's inability to administer FOIA makes it too easy for agencies to keep secrets, and nonexistent disclosure rules around donations to presidential libraries provide easy cover for bad actors and potential corruption."
It's not just FPF sounding the alarm about the aircraft. The complaint points out that "a number of stakeholders, including ethics experts and several GOP lawmakers, have questioned the propriety and legality of the move, including whether acceptance of the plane would violate the U.S. Constitution's foreign emoluments clause... which prohibits a president from receiving gifts or benefits from foreign governments without the consent of Congress."
Some opponents of the "comically corrupt" so-called gift stressed that it came after the Trump Organization, the Saudi partner DarGlobal, and a company owned by the Qatari government reached a deal to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar.
Despite some initial GOP criticism of the president taking the aircraft, just hours after the Trump administration formally accepted the jet in May, U.S. Senate Republicans thwarted an attempt by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to pass by unanimous consent legislation intended to prevent a foreign plane from serving as Air Force One.
"Although President Trump characterized the deal as a smart business decision, remarking that it would be 'stupid' not to accept 'a free, very expensive airplane,' experts have noted that it will be costly to retrofit the jet for use as Air Force One, with estimatesranging from less than $400 million to more than $1 billion," the complaint states.
As The New York Times reported Sunday:
Officially, and conveniently, the price tag has been classified. But even by Washington standards, where "black budgets" are often used as an excuse to avoid revealing the cost of outdated spy satellites and lavish end-of-year parties, the techniques being used to hide the cost of Mr. Trump's pet project are inventive.
Which may explain why no one wants to discuss a mysterious, $934 million transfer of funds from one of the Pentagon's most over-budget, out-of-control projects—the modernization of America's aging, ground-based nuclear missiles...
Air Force officials privately concede that they are paying for renovations of the Qatari Air Force One with the transfer from another the massively-over-budget, behind-schedule program, called the Sentinel.
Preparations to refit the plane "are underway, and floor plans or schematics have been seen by senior U.S. officials," according to Monday reporting by CBS News. One unnamed budget official who spoke to the outlet also "believes the money to pay for upgrades will come from the Sentinel program."
Chioma Chukwu, executive director of American Oversight, said Monday that "President Trump's deal to take a $400 million luxury jet from a foreign government deserves full public scrutiny—not a stiff-arm from the Department of Justice."
"This is precisely the kind of corrupt arrangement that public records laws are designed to expose," Chukwu added. "The DOJ cannot sit on its hands and expect the American people to wait years for the truth while serious questions about corruption, self-dealing, and foreign influence go unanswered."
The complaint highlights that "Bondi's decision not to recuse herself from this matter, despite her links to the Qatari government, adds to a growing body of questionable ethical practices that have arisen during her short tenure as attorney general."
It also emphasizes that "the Qatari jet is just one in a list of current and prospective extravagant donations to President Trump's presidential library foundation that has raised significant questions about the use of private foundation donations to improperly influence government policy."
"Notably, ABC News and Paramount each agreed to resolve cases President Trump filed against the media entities by paying multimillion-dollar settlements to the Trump presidential library foundation, with Paramount's $16 million agreed payout coming at the same time it sought government approval for a planned merger with Skydance," the filing details. "On July 24, the Federal Communications Commission announced its approval of the $8 billion merger."
Trump Administration Lets Federal Employees Push Religion in Workplaces
"The Trump regime just handed Christian nationalists a loaded weapon: your federal workplace," said one critic.
Jul 28, 2025
The Trump administration issued a memo Monday allowing federal employees to proselytize in the workplace, a move welcomed by many conservatives but denounced by proponents of the separation of church and state.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) memo "provides clear guidance to ensure federal employees may express their religious beliefs through prayer, personal items, group gatherings, and conversations without fear of discrimination or retaliation."
"Employees must be allowed to engage in private religious expression in work areas to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious private expression," the memo states.
Federal workers "should be permitted to display and use items used for religious purposes or icons of a religiously significant nature, including but not limited to bibles, artwork, jewelry, posters displaying religious messages, and other indicia of religion (such as crosses, crucifixes, and mezuzahs) on their desks, on their person, and in their assigned workspaces," the document continues.
"Employees may engage in conversations regarding religious topics with fellow employees, including attempting to persuade others of the correctness of their own religious views, provided that such efforts are not harassing in nature," OPM said—without elaborating on what constitutes harassment.
"These shocking changes essentially permit workplace evangelizing."
"Employees may also encourage their coworkers to participate in religious expressions of faith, such as prayer, to the same extent that they would be permitted to encourage coworkers participate in other personal activities," the memo adds.
OPM Director Scott Kupor said in a statement that "federal employees should never have to choose between their faith and their career."
"This guidance ensures the federal workplace is not just compliant with the law but welcoming to Americans of all faiths," Kupor added. "Under President [Donald] Trump's leadership, we are restoring constitutional freedoms and making government a place where people of faith are respected, not sidelined."
The OPM memo was widely applauded by conservative social media users—although some were dismayed that the new rules also apply to Muslims.
Critics, however, blasted what the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) called "a gift to evangelicals and the myth of 'anti-Christian bias.'"
FFRF co-president Laurie Gaylor said that "these shocking changes essentially permit workplace evangelizing, but worse still, allow supervisors to evangelize underlings and federal workers to proselytize the public they serve."
"This is the implementation of Christian nationalism in our federal government," Gaylor added.
The Secular Coalition for America denounced the memo as "another effort to grant privileges to certain religions while ignoring nonreligious people's rights."
Monday's memo follows another issued by Kupor on July 16 that encouraged federal agencies to take a "generous approach" to evaluating government employees who request telework and other flexibilities due to their religious beliefs.
The OPM directives follow the U.S. Supreme Court's 2023 Groff v. DeJoy ruling, in which the court's right-wing majority declared that Article VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business."
The new memo also comes on the heels of three religion-based executive orders issued by Trump during his second term. One order established a White House Faith Office tasked with ensuring religious organizations have a voice in the federal government. Another seeks to "eradicate" what Trump claims is the "anti-Christian weaponization of government." Yet another created a Religious Liberty Commission meant to promote and protect religious freedom.
'May His Memory Be a Revolution': Palestinian Peace Activist Killed by Israeli Settler After Being Deported by Trump
Awda Hathaleen was described as "a teacher and an activist who struggled courageously for his people."
Jul 28, 2025
A Palestinian peace activist has been fatally shot by a notorious Israeli settler who was once the subject of sanctions that were lifted this year by U.S. President Donald Trump.
In June, Awda Hathaleen—an English teacher, activist, and former soccer player from the occupied West Bank—was detained alongside his cousin Eid at the airport in San Francisco, where they were about to embark on an interfaith speaking tour organized by the California-based Kehilla Community Synagogue.
Ben Linder, co-chair of the Silicon Valley chapter of J Street and the organizer of Eid and Awda's first scheduled speaking engagement told Middle East Eye that he'd known the two cousins for 10 years, describing them as "true nonviolent peace activists" who "came here on an interfaith peace-promoting mission."
Without explanation from U.S. authorities, they were deported and returned to their village of Umm al-Khair in the South Hebron Hills.
On Monday afternoon, the activist group Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) reported on social media that Awda Hathaleen had been killed after Israeli settlers attacked his village and that a relative of his was also severely injured:
Activists working with Awda report that Israeli settlers invaded Umm al-Kheir with a bulldozer to destroy what little remains of the Palestinian village. As Awda and his family tried to defend their homes and land, a settler opened fire—both aiming directly and shooting indiscriminately. Awda was shot in the chest and later died from his injuries after being taken by an Israeli ambulance. His death was the result of brutal settler violence.
Later, when Awda's relative Ahmad al-Hathaleen tried to block the bulldozer, the settler driving it ran him over. Ahmad is now being treated in a nearby hospital.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz later confirmed these events, adding:
An eyewitness reported that the entry of Israeli settlers into Palestinian private lands, riding an excavator, caused a commotion, and the vehicle subsequently struck a resident named Ahmad Hathaleen. "People lost their minds, and the children threw stones," he said.
A friend and fellow activist, Mohammad Hureini, posted the video of the attack online. The settler who fired the gun has been identified by Haaretz as Yinon Levi, who has previously been hit—along with other settlers—with sanctions by former U.S. President Joe Biden's administration and other governments over his past harassment of Palestinians in the West Bank.
As the Biden State Department wrote at the time:
Levi consistently leads a group of settlers who attack Palestinians, set fire to their fields, destroy their property, and threaten them with further harm if they do not leave their homes.
The sanctions were later lifted by U.S. President Donald Trump. However, they'd already been rendered virtually ineffective after the intervention of far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who has expressed a desire to ethnically cleanse Gaza and the West Bank of Palestinians to make way for Jewish settlements.
Brooklyn-based journalist Jasper Nathaniel, who has covered other cases of settler violence for Zeteo described Levi as "a known terrorist who's been protected by the Israeli government for years," adding that, "One of the only good things Biden did for Palestine was sanction him."
Violence by Israeli settlers in the illegally-occupied West Bank has risen sharply since the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas and the subsequent 21-month military campaign by Israel in Gaza.
Nearly 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by settlers during that time. More than 6,400 have been forcibly displaced following the demolition of their homes by Israel, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).
The killing of Awda Hathaleen—who had a wife and three young children—has been met with outpourings of grief and anger from his fellow peace activists in the United States, Israel, and Palestine.
Issa Amro, the Hebron-based co-founder of the grassroots group Youth Against Settlements, described Awda as a "beloved hero."
"Awda stood with dignity and courage against oppression," Amro said. "His loss is a deep wound to our hearts and our struggle for justice."
Israeli journalist and filmmaker Yuval Abraham, who last year directed the Oscar-winning documentary No Other Land about the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, described Awda Hathaleen as "a remarkable activist," and thanked him for helping his team shoot the film in Masafer Yatta.
"To know Awda Hathaleen is to love him," said the post from JVP announcing his death. "Awda has always been a pillar amongst his family, his village and the wider international community of activists who had the pleasure to meet Awda."
Israeli-American peace activist Mattan Berner-Kadish wrote: "May his memory be a revolution. I will remember him smiling, laughing, dreaming of a better future for his children. We must make it so."
Most Popular
We cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Please support our journalism.