Archive for the 'Bush' Category

Long after 9/11, Afghanistan struggles to find way

On the occasion of the fifth anniversary of 9/11, I’ve been thinking of writing an article about how far Afghanistan has come since the ousting of the Taliban. While doing research on the internet, I came across this Reuters article which quite adequately sums up the entire situation. My own previous writings related to this topic are linked at the end of this post.

BAMIYAN: Life is grim when you can’t pay the rent on a scorpion-infested cave, there is no job in sight and desperate people are waiting to take your spot.

As Afghanistan struggles to rebuild five years after September 11 and the fall of the Taliban, hundreds of families are trapped in a sprawling web of caves in the lush Bamiyan valley, surrounded by stark, desert mountains and famous for two giant Buddhas blown up in 2001.

“We have no work. Our lives are getting worse. We can’t get enough food,” says Mahtab, a 35-year-old mother of six perched on a narrow path carved into a cliff, nursing her year-old daughter Fatema, her hair stiff with sand.

Five years on, Bamiyan is at once a symbol of the progress that has been made and of the lack of it in Afghanistan.

Bamiyan has Afghanistan’s first and only woman governor and is trying to rebuild its tourist trade. But it remains desperately poor, dragged down by the failure of President Hamid Karzai and his Western backers to kick-start the economy while eliminating opium production.

With the Taliban at its strongest since 2001 and opium production at record levels, violence is blocking efforts at economic development.

The lack of jobs means more people are willing to grow opium poppies, bolsters warlords and forces impoverished villagers into the arms of the Taliban as paid fighters.

“We have the young generation and all of them, they are jobless, the majority of them they are jobless,” says Bamiyan’s thoughtful, soft-spoken Governor Habiba Sarabi, a doctor.

“Of course, the enemy of Afghanistan can use this very sensitive and emotional young generation. They can give money for these young people and use it as a terrorist thing.”

During their five-year rule, the Taliban barred women from going outside without a male escort and from most work. Girls were denied education. The Taliban held public executions, banned music and cinema and destroyed the ancient statues of Buddha in Bamiyan because they were deemed un-Islamic.

The Taliban have made a strong comeback this year and fighting is the worst it has been since US-led troops toppled the hard-line Islamists for giving refuge to Osama bin Laden, architect of the September 11 attacks.

More than 2000 people have been killed this year alone, mainly in the Taliban’s southern heartland.

Nato forces launched their biggest land offensive last weekend, Operation Medusa, to crush the Taliban in the south. Nato has about 16,500 troops in the country.

The Taliban’s No 2, Mullah Obaidullah, says support is growing among Afghans disillusioned with violence, corruption, the lack of reconstruction and the drugs trade.

“The Taliban had established a true peace in the country with law and order,” he said from an undisclosed location. “But now, the country has become a centre of instability, killings, plundering, obscenity and drugs.

“There is no protection for the life or property of any individual. Everybody has seen the true face of the US and its allies. Therefore, the Afghan people are supporting the Taliban.”

Amidala Tarzi, a leading academic, writer and former cabinet minister, says reconstruction so far was far from adequate.

“For the common people, I think so far very, very little has been done,” he says. “In fact, I think that the whole effort has been downgraded. It’s become more difficult for the common man.

“There is no production and there is nothing you can call investment,” he added.

Along with the lack of a real economy, he singles out the failure to provide public housing as a major problem. Many Afghans live in mud-brick huts with no running water or sewage system. Disease is rife and food is short.

By some estimates, 10 times more money has been spent on security and defence in five years than on development. Politicians and analysts say much aid money is stolen or wasted.

Although the people of Bamiyan have rallied in the streets over the lack of progress, Governor Sarabi says the news is not all bad.

Her priority is roads, to improve links with the rest of the country and bring the tourists back. Bamiyan city is a bruising 7-8 hour drive from Kabul, mostly along a dirt road still littered with sinister wrecks of tanks and armoured personnel carriers.

Sarabi faces other problems. Local warlords are fighting a political campaign to have her replaced by someone more sympathetic to them.

As the country’s first woman governor, expectations are high she will draw extra attention – and money.

“One of the biggest difficulties at the moment is people’s expectations are very high,” she says. “People think that I as the only (woman) governor will take a lot of attention from the international community but in practice it’s not like that.”

In the cliffs of Bamiyan, all the safe caves are full, with more than 20 people sometimes sleeping head-to-toe and side-by-side on threadbare carpet. Chunks of rock fall from the bare ceiling and walls and scorpions infest every crack.

It’s a dusty, filthy life with dung from donkeys, calves and goats littering the paths and lying outside the oven-like caves.

Still, there is a waiting list of people living in tents and local business people charge rent – 1000 Afghanis ($NZ31)) for Mahtab’s sleeping room and separate cooking cave.

“He told us if we don’t pay, we will have to leave here,” she says, frowning. “We don’t have anywhere else to live. We don’t have any money. We don’t know what we will do. God knows!”

Source.

Related MyScribbles Links:

Advertisements

MyScribbles Responds: Answers to Comments on America’s Dirtiest Open Secrets

When I originally posted America’s Dirtiest Open Secrets, I intended it to be only of educative nature. However, it became astonishingly popular and attracted an unprecedented level of user comments. However, most of the comments were illogical and emotional. I had tried to supply proof in order to substantiate what I said, but instead, I met irrationality and emotionality. I received a lot of comments like: “The second part of # 3 is bullshit”, “Yes, we people of the U.S.A. completely f*cked things up and now take full responsibility for the error of our ways”, “i’m getting really tired of reading so much ant-america crud. if you don’t like living here in america them move!! better yet,join the dam*ed iraqi movement”, “…but your article is hypocritical, fallacious, a harangued calumny!…But its good though”, etc.

However, there were some very thoughtful comments too from which I learned a lot. Also, there were some that require more attention. Here they are with my responses to them…


“We should have allowed the Russians to simply conquer Afghanistan How dare we interfere!”

Did you know that the Afghans were better off during the Soviet-installed regime of Dr Najibullah than during any other period in the last fifty years? Prices were low, employment was high, food and ration were distributed among the people plentifully and the country was peaceful. Everyone was happy. Then came the Mujahideen and worse yet, the American-sponsored Taliban. Life became very bad for everyone. Killings, beatings and public executions became the order of the day.

And by the way, you didn’t interfere because you wanted to help; you interfered because you wanted to curb the growth of the Communist bloc in Central Asia.

“And Iran, a country 3 times the population of Iraq, should have been allowed to conquer their neighbor.” [Comment justifying the US backing of Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war]

Actually Iran didn’t attack Iraq; rather, it was the other way round. Even if it had been so, do you think it would have been legitimate to urge and help Iraq to counter the Iranian attack by the use of chemical weapons on civilians?

“Yes, we tried to help a friendly government (the Shah) and stopped helping when the crazies took over.” [Comment about the American help for the start-up of the Iranian nuclear program during the Shah]

You were not helping a ‘friendly country’, you were using a yes-man (the Shah) to further your own profits. Remember the six billion dollars in cash profits that went into corporate accounts in America?

“And yes, I remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Do you remember Pearl Harbor???” [Comment justifying the American use of the atom bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki]

Oh, yes, I remember Pearl Harbor: It was a military base in Oahu, Hawaii, which was attacked by Japanese fighter planes on December 7, 1941. It was a military base. And you are trying to make the attack on a military target as an excuse to mount an attack on two purely civilian targets. And remember, one of the basic criteria for selecting Hiroshima and Nagasaki was that the bombs should produce the highest possible effect on the morale of the Japanese people by killing them and inflicting damage unto them and their property to the maximum extent possible.

“there is nothing wrong with helping another nation create something of this nature” [comment about America’s backing to start Iran’s atomic program during the Shah]

 

There are many problems with helping a nation gain an atomic bomb. The foremost problem is that you are going against the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (I admit, the US helped start Iran’s nuclear program before the NPT came into effect). Then there is the problem of irresponsible usage and further proliferation. I think these two reasons are enough to deter any nation state from helping another nation to make an atomic bomb.

“Fat man and Little boy probably did more to stop continuing attempts at conquest than anything ever has in history, it puzzles me why not many see this as clearly as I do.” [Comment justifying the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki]

 

 

Fat Man and Little Boy have also probably killed more civilians in one shot than any other bomb. I believe the use of a weapon of mass destruction is almost never justified; and, in the circumstances prevalent in Japan at that time, it was a complete no-no. This view is echoed by Einstein and Szliard, the two scientists who prompted America to make atom bombs. Furthermore, according to General Douglas McArthur, General Carl Spaatz, Brigadier General Carter Clark, Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy and some other high-ranking American army officials at that time, the target of deterring the Japanese from further continuing the war could have been achieved by other more feasible tactics. In addition, as General Eisenhower had advised the Secretary of War, Henry Stimson, in July 1945, the Japanese had almost essentially been defeated much before the use of the bomb. Wikipedia has a good argumentative article both for and against the use of the atomic bomb. I hope you will read them and come to a more rational conclusion rather than an emotional one motivated by patriotism and other such feelings.

 

“I also notice that you post nothing of the good Americas has and continues to do around the world. Why don’t you write about how wonderful your world would be without America?”

First, it is wrong that I don’t write the about ‘good’ things America has done. Second, there are not enough really good things done by America to inspire me to write about them. All I see are maladministration, misconduct, anti-human and egoistic policies being pursued by American politicians.

My world (as an Afghan) would have been far better if it weren’t for America. It would have been far better if I, my family and my people hadn’t suffered in the hands of the American-backed Taliban and Al-Qaeda. It would have been far better if I hadn’t suffered the disastrous effects of the destructive policies pursued and formulated in Washington. It would have been far better if my country hadn’t seen the wars and destruction it saw in the hands of superpowers including Britain and Soviet Union. It would have been far better if I had lived and educated among my people and in the peaceful atmosphere of my country. It would have been far better if I hadn’t been rendered destitute as a result of American and Soviet imperialistic policies.

 

Also, the world would have been far better for me and many other people form Vietnam, Iraq, North Korea, the Balkans, Japan, Cambodia, Palestine, Israel, Niger and all other places around the world where they are either directly affected by American policies or indirectly by the misconduct of its greedy multinationals and puppet regimes.

 

 

“You cannot lay the blame for Al-Quaeda on America, no more than you can lay the blame of atrocities of any war upon the shoulders of civilians.”

America created Al-Qaeda, funded it, provided it with logistical support and expertise and legitimized it among the Muslim people. This is a solid, proven fact. Don’t you think America should be blamed for it?

 

 

 

“I just…I’m scared of the terrorists.”

That is exactly what the Bush administration wants you to be. It wants to capitalize upon your fears in order to levy more tax on your hard-earned money so that they can spend trillions of dollars on buying arms and creating and funding organizations like Al-Qaeda.

 

“i’m getting really tired of reading so much ant-america crud. if you don’t like living here in america them move!! better yet,join the dam*ed iraqi movement”

Just because you are tired of hearing ‘anti-American crud’ doesn’t mean the realities have changed and that America didn’t do the wrong it has done. All of this ‘anti-American crud’ is intended to awaken negligent citizens in America and to motivate them to take action.

 

Also, I am not living in America. I am an Afghan living in Pakistan.

 

“This guy is an Afgan living in Pakistan. Most likely a pashtun loser. Get a life moron, your country is doing great without you. Come back to Afganistan and w’ll kick your butt in public.”

Yep, I am an Afghan living in Pakistan. However, I am not a ‘Pashtun loser.’ Quite on the contrary, I am a Hazara—one of the three largest ethnic groups and the most down-trodden one. Please do not try to make a distinction between the different ethnic groups in my country. We are trying to stay calmly and peacefully together. Oh, and who are you to kick my butt in my own country?

And by the way, if you can not contribute to a public debate like this in a responsible, logical manner, why do you resort to irrationality and bad behavior?

“Can we truly believe everything written in Wikipedia? My history is not that strong but I believe in the saying that history is written by the victors. There may be more than meets the eye.” [Comment regarding the selection of my sources to back my opinions]

If you were to believe any source of information, you would most probably believe Wikipedia. It is written by knowledgeable people volunteering from around the world. It has a good moderation policy. If a writer shows a biased opinion or inaccuracy, readers and writers from around the world can point it out and the problem would be settled in a ‘discussion page’. This doesn’t mean Wikipedia is completely accurate and unbiased, but it is much more accurate and unbiased than any other source because it is not bounded by corporate or state interests.

“Yes, the USA has done great things for world as well.”

I don’t remember anything truly nice done by America. All the ‘nice’ things done are a result of the cunning of American administrations in shaping the public view in their own interest. And very honestly, maybe I am too skeptical of the American foreign policy to notice the ‘nice’ things, but I am very truthfully waiting for someone to show me something truly good that America has done for all the peoples of the world.

“But average American people are not in the situation room at the Pentagon.” [Comment arguing that American citizens are doing enough to keep a check on their politicians]

America is a democratic country in which the policymakers can be directly held accountable for their wrongdoings. And quite honestly the rest of the world hasn’t seen any remarkable sense of responsibility from the American public in the wake of the destructive policies its policymakers pursue. Many Americans say, “Look, I’m an average American guy. I can sense all the terrible things done by my government. But I did my part. I didn’t vote for Bush and the other creeps.” But they fail to recognize that their democratic duties range far beyond only using their vote. As George Bush once said, “With great power comes greater responsibility”, and, as the citizens of the most powerful country in the world, you have the greatest responsibility to keep your policymakers sane.

I am not saying America has to be 100% noble and sane. It is powerful. And power, by nature, is subjugating, dominating and greedy. Therefore, American citizens have to do their best to keep it as sane as possible.

America’s Dirtiest Open Secrets

(Or Five Things Everyone Must Know About America)

The Americans admit it themselves and I agree: They are a bunch of oblivious folks too engrossed in their struggle to obtain the American Dream to pay heed to anything else. They have too much of a blind faith in their democratic values and in their elected leaders. Therefore, they do too little to keep a check on the activities of these leaders. Resultantly, they pursue policies which, despite being in negation to the American values, go unchecked—even supported at times.

This post attempts to introduce to them—and to all of my readers—some of the dark policies pursued by American politicians.

  1. America created the biggest and most dangerous terrorist organization—Al-Qaeda. Yes, America created Al-Qaeda. When the Russians invaded Afghanistan in the late 70s, Al-Qaeda emerged as an international Jihadi movement against the Soviets. It was funded directly by the Pakistanis and Saudis and indirectly by America, which channeled its military hardware and other logistics through the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Directorate. For more details, read this Wikipedia article.
  2. America created the Taliban. Again yes, America created the Taliban. Ahmad Rashid, a widely acclaimed Pakistani intellectual, writes in his book, Taliban, that: “The Taliban originated when the CIA with ISI recruited radical Muslims from around the world to fight with the Afghan mujahadeen against the Soviet Union.” Ahmed Rashid also estimates that after 1982 more than 100,000 Muslims from dozens of countries received political or military training in the CIA-backed camps of Pakistan and Afghanistan. For more details, read this Wikipedia article about Taliban.
  3. America sold arms to Iraq and urged it to use WMDs against civilians in Iran. During Iraq’s war with Iran, many American policymakers, arms suppliers and makers benefited immensely by selling large amounts of weaponry to Iraq. These weapons included chemical agents like cyanide. In addition, America also encouraged Iraq to use chemical weapons against Iranian civilians and helped Iraq develop its chemical weapons arsenal. For more details, read Iraq and Chemical Weapons: the US Connection by Daniel E Boles.
  4. America helped Iran to start its nuclear program. During the Shah’s period, America signed two agreements–the Atoms for Peace Program and the U.S.-Iran Nuclear Cooperation Agreement–with Iran to urge it to start its nuclear program. These two pacts, which would help Iran build up to 20 nuclear reactors, brought the US corporations as much as $6 billion in profits. However, after the Iranian revolution of 1979, America stopped backing Iran and its nuclear program. Resultantly, the program remained suspended for some time. Today, however, Iran is still trying to pursue what it calls a peaceful nuclear program. For more details read this Wikipedia article and this report written from an Iranian perspective.
  5. America is the only country to have used WMDs against civilians. Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki? American bombs, Little Boy and Fat Man, killed 66 and 39,000 innocent civilians respectively. This Yale University website has a very good report.

America also used Depleted Uranium (DU) in the Gulf War, in the Balkans and allegedly in its recent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. DU is a highly penetrating, toxic element which can cause an increase in cancers and severe birth defects. The use of DU not only affected American war veterans, but has also thousands, maybe millions of innocent people in areas it was used. DU is considered to be a WMD and its use is prohibited by many international agreements. For more details, read this BBC report, this Information Clearing House article, this Sunday Herald report and this report by Prof. M. Miraki, an Afghan expatriate [WARNING: This last report contains extremely graphic images which most visitors may find disturbing].

America’s use of the herbicide, Agent Orange, not only caused health problems and damage to its own veterans in Vietnam, but also to millions of Vietnamese who live in areas sprayed by this toxic agent. Currently there are 150,000 Vietnamese children with birth defects caused by Agent Orange. For more information, read this BBC report, this Wikipedia article, and the Department of Veterans Affairs website.

With all these hideous crimes, I fail to find a reason why Americans still back administrations which are not only against American values, but also against the common human morals; which kill indiscriminately and which only think of their own personal ends and those of a few corporations. This makes Noam Chomsky’s claim that thought control is conducted to spread a matrix of necessary illusions, true; and, the necessity of ‘an intellectual self-defense’, inevitable.

 

Links Worth Visiting:


Tags: Add to: blogmarks | del.icio.us | Newsvine | Raw Sugar | reddit | Simpy | | Yahoo My Web


The Logic Behind Supreme Court’s Anti-Bush Ruling

The Supreme Court of the United States of America yesterday ruled against President Bush’s plans to try Guantanamo inmates in military courts. This means President Bush has no alternative other than trying those suspects—of which only ten have been charged—in US civil courts. In this post I aim to explain the logic behind this decision.

The key controversy surrounding this case was whether or not to accept the Guantanamo inmates as prisoners of war; and, subsequently, whether or not to deal with them as per the provisions of the Geneva Convention. President Bush and company refused to deem them prisoners of war, and, therefore, refused to treat them according to the Geneva Convention. The judges, citing article 3 of the Convention, ruled that Al-Qaeda combatants are prisoners of war and that they deserve treatment according to the Geneva Convention.

Article 3 provides:

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

  1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.”

The military tribunals, carrying out the trials of the detainees, are authorized by President Bush to:

  • Provide evidence acquired by torturing the defendants
  • Assert pressure on the defendants’ attorneys otherwise not allowed in civilian courts
  • Keep parts of the trial secret from the defendant.

However, all three of these authorities provided by President Bush are against the Geneva Convention. Again, according to the Convention:

… the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Hence, the judges ruled President Bush’s decision to try Guantanamo inmates in military tribunals illegal. However, it may reasonably be inferred, that the suspects kept at Abu Ghraib and Bagram (Afghanistan), may also have to be tried in civilian courts.

Links worth visiting:


Tags: Socialize: blogmarks | del.icio.us | Furl | kinja | Newsvine | Raw Sugar | reddit | Rojo | Simpy | Spurl | Tailrank | Technorati | Yahoo My Web

Guantanamo Suicides ‘an Act of War’?

The US started to use its naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba in 2002 to keep some of Al-Qaeda's suspected members. Since then, it has kept hundreds of suspected prisoners at the facility without any specific evidence against them and/or providing them a fair trial.

A few weeks ago, a group of inmates attempted suicide but were suppressed by brute force. Today again they attempted suicide after a spell of hunger strikes. This time, however, a Yemeni and two Saudis were successful in their attempts.

Quite preposterously, though, the Guantanamo commander called these suicides a 'PR move' and 'an act of war'.

Those inmates were Muslims. Therefore, this can't even be 'an act of war' as Islam doesn't allow suicide. It isn't even an act of war by terrorist standards: It didn't kill American soldiers. It didn't intimidate the (Iraqi and/or Afghan) public by killing a bunch of people in a busy market. Rather, the inmates have been so desperate and hopeless after years of detention that they found no way other than suicide-a religious taboo-to free themselves.

Likewise, considering the United States' history of defiance and disregard to the international law, one can assume that it was clearly not a 'PR move.' All the media attention and criticism over the years against the United States' mistreatment of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other detention centers have yielded very little. Keeping this in mind, it seems preposterous for the inmates to use their lives as a 'PR move' to grab the attention of the international community.

It is, rather, an act of utter frustration and anxiety as a result of years of illegal detention, inhumane treatment, religious and personal humiliation, lack of access to legal counsel, isolation from their families, etc.

Tags: , , , ,

Arguments for Iran’s Nuclear Program

The US-Iran nuclear standoff is one of the hottest political issues of today. While for many the US stance is clear, that of Iran is little understood. This post tries to explain the Iranian stance on the issue.


America and Israel—two of the most outspoken proponents of dismantling the Iranian nuclear program—level the following charges against Iran:

  1. Iran doesn’t need nuclear energy because it has vast oil reserves. This means, despite its claims, it is not acquiring the technology for civilian purposes. Rather, it is striving to make a bomb.
  2. If it gets the bomb, it will destroy Israel, whose existence it doesn’t reconcile with.

The Iranians counter the arguments by the following points:

  1. Iran needs nuclear fuel.
    • Its population has doubled over the last two decades leading to an increase in energy demand. This is coupled with a decrease in oil production. During the Shah, Iran produced 6 million barrels of oil per day, while it currently produces only 4 million barrels.
    • It regularly imports electricity due to shortages.
    • The excess capacity required to produce enough electricity to meet demands would cost Iran $40 billion excluding the cost of buying power plant equipments. Harnessing nuclear power costs a fraction of that amount, considering the fact that Iran has vast supplies of uranium ore.
    • Burning too much oil to produce electricity to meet demands will deplete Iranian atmosphere too drastically.
    • It wants to spend its precious oil reserves for other more beneficial purposes.
    • It wants to diversify its energy sources in the backdrop of its fast depleting oil reserves.
    • Even countries rich in oil like Britain and Russia rely on nuclear power
  2. Iran is not pursuing a military nuclear program
    • Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, issued a fatwa (religious edict) forbidding the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons on August 9, 2005.
    • Currently Iran can only enrich uranium up to 3.5%, which is good enough for producing nuclear energy, not for bombs (Weapon-grade uranium has to be enriched up to 90%).
    • The IAEA inspectors have found no convincing proof that Iran is pursuing a program for military purposes. In fact, the US too has no convincing proof; It is only leveling allegations based on hypothetical assertions.
    • Iran’s former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, said on December 14, 2001: If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists' strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world. It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality.
  3. It is Iran’s right to have nuclear technology for peaceful purposes
    • Iran is a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which allows all signatories to build nuclear facilities and enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

It must be noted, however, that Iran's nuclear program was started in 1960s "under the auspices of the US within the framework of bilateral agreements between the two countries."

Further Reading:


Tags: , , , ,


US Troops to Learn Not to Kill Babies and 76-Year-Olds

After recognizing that the Marines in Haditha “suffered a total breakdown in morality and leadership”, the US military commanders in Iraq said troops would get ethics training. Part of the training would be to learn not to bust their way into an unarmed civilian’s house and kill babies and 76-yuear-olds.

This training program has been organized after the US Marines killed as many as 24 Iraqi civilians; apparently in retaliation to a roadside bomb, which killed one of their counterparts. Out of those killed were a 76-year-old amputee and a one-year-old baby.

After having done so, the Marines fabricated a story saying 15 civilians were killed in the roadside bomb. Another Marine version of this story states that the civilians were inadvertently killed in a running battle with the insurgents. Evidence from a study by Time magazine suggests none of these accounts is true and that military officials tried to hide this massacre.

I can imagine no state of affairs to be more shameful for the troops of a country which styles itself as the protector of human rights and which invades a country promising democracy, safety and better lives. And apart from my disagreements with the administrative hierarchy of this war, I can’t understand why an average American still believes the troops are ‘protecting’ the nation against WMDs. Is it that it seems the ‘dimwit’ Bush is not that dimwit at all after having displayed this marvelous show of misleading America by skillfully manipulating his propaganda machines?

Or is it that I am a dimwit myself not having been able to understand that in Capitalism, money is everything, and with all the oil cash flowing into Bush’s CGI account, he is no smarter than anyone else not to heavily grease the palm of media opportunists and hence lay out the matrix of ‘necessary illusions’?

You decide.

UPDATE: Evidence Emerge of Fresh Iraqi Massacre–This time it's a 6-month-old baby and its 76-year-old grandma.


Tags: , , , ,
Add To:



Welcome!

I no longer update this weblog due to academic and other preoccupations. However, feel free to browse through its older entries. Thanks.
                      ---
This is a weblog where a journalism enthusiast Afghan student writes about hot contemporary issues from an Afghan perspective. Enjoy your visit! Contact: mail . myscribbles @ gmail . com

Pictures from Afghanistan

Blog Stats

  • 67,124 Visits Since March 2006
Advertisements