Afghans Fed Up With Government, US
GHANI KHIEL, Afghanistan - The bearded, turbaned men gather beneath a large, leafy tree in rural eastern Nangarhar province. When Malik Mohammed speaks on their behalf, his voice is soft but his words are harsh. Mohammed makes it clear that the tribal chiefs have lost all faith in both their own government and the foreign soldiers in their country.
Such disillusionment is widespread in Afghanistan, feeding an insurgency that has killed 195 foreign soldiers so far this year, 105 of them Americans.
"This is our land. We are afraid to send our sons out the door for fear the American troops will pick them up," says Mohammed, who was chosen by the others to represent them. "Daily we have headaches from the troops. We are fed up. Our government is weak and corrupt and the American soldiers have learned nothing."
A strong sense of frustration echoed through dozens of interviews by The Associated Press with Afghan villagers, police, government officials, tribal elders and Taliban who left and rejoined the religious movement. The interviews ranged from the capital, Kabul, to the rural regions near the border with Pakistan.
The overwhelming result: Ordinary Afghans are deeply bitter about American and NATO forces because of errant bombs, heavy-handed searches and seizures and a sense that the foreigners do not understand their culture. They are equally fed up with what they see as seven years of corruption and incompetence in a U.S.-backed government that has largely failed to deliver on development.
Even with more foreign troops, Afghanistan is now less secure.
"It certainly is a mess. Security is the worst that it has been for years. Corruption is out of control. It impacts every single Afghan," says Doug Wankel, a burly 62-year-old American who coordinated Washington's anti-drug policy in Afghanistan from 2004 until 2007 and is now back as a security consultant. "What people have to understand is that what ordinary Afghans think really does matter."
The fear and fury is evident among the neighbors at Akhtar Mohammed's walled home deep within Nangarhar province, reached by a dirt road along a dirty brown canal. A dozen men lie on traditional rope beds beneath a thatched roof. Some wear the full-bodied beard of the devout, with a clean-shaven upper lip. Others have dyed their gray beards a flaming orange with henna to show that they have made the pilgrimage to the holy site of Mecca.
They live barely an hour's drive from an errant bombing last month that hit a wedding party and killed about 50 people. Khiel Shah says his home was raided two months earlier, and troops killed his nephew, a high school student.
An old man sits by moaning, "No, no, they weren't Taliban. They were going to the bathroom. They weren't even carrying guns."
Villagers want to know why people who give false information are not arrested, and they say American soldiers still can't sift the good intelligence from the bad.
"But now this is seven years. I am hopeless. They haven't learned until now," says Akhtar Mohammed.
NATO's top Gen. David D. McKiernan blames civilian deaths on insurgents who hide among the population. But the problem could also be one of strategy, says Robert Oakley, a former U.S. ambassador and National Security Council staff member.
"There is a contradiction between wanting to minimize Afghan civilian casualties and minimizing U.S. military casualties," he says. "For the former, we should go on the ground. For the latter, go in from the air."
An air strike in Herat province about two weeks ago killed dozens of people. A U.S. investigation concluded that most were Taliban, but the Afghan government and the United Nations say up to 90 civilians died, including children.
Villagers say the U.S. does not understand how complex alliances, violence and even drugs play out in their culture. The eyes of elderly Malik Bakhtiar well with tears as he recalls his brother's arrest by U.S. troops for apparently running a drug laboratory in his home. In certain regions of Afghanistan, people grow opium for their livelihood.
"They don't understand us," Bakhtiar says. "Every house has a gun. Every house has opium."
Inside the walled compound of the Independent Human Rights Commission in Kabul, workers are knee-deep in statistics that measure the dissatisfaction of Afghans. An army of workers crisscrossed 33 of the country's 34 provinces and took the opinions of 15,200 people, mostly in rural areas. The survey has not been released, but Ahmad Nader Nadery, the commissioner, gave The AP a preview.
The survey, done annually for the past three years, shows a steady deterioration in the social and economic stability of Afghans, Nadery says. Average debt last year was $1,000 and is now 20 percent higher. And up to 73 percent of Afghans say they cannot go to the government for help unless they have money or power.
"Elders say when they go to government officials, they face humiliation," Nadery says in his cramped ground floor office.
Najib, a policeman who asks not to be identified beyond his first name for fear of losing his job, reflects the general anger.
Since he joined Afghanistan's police force in 2001, he has been mistakenly bombed by a U.S. airplane that killed seven of his colleagues. He has paid bribes to government officials, he says, and taken bribes to balance his books. He recalls watching a friend buy a police job for $2,000, and notes that posts with better opportunities for bribery are available for upward of $10,000.
Corruption has made it easier for the Taliban to infiltrate police ranks and carry out lethal attacks, according to Najib.
"The president is crying, but nothing has changed," says Najib, who still walks with a limp from the U.S. bombing. "People are unhappy, and more and more it will become difficult for the Americans and good for the Taliban. These people (U.S. troops) are not making one mistake, but they are making one thousand mistakes and they are killing many people."
In an exclusive interview with the AP, President Hamid Karzai said the mistakes of troops are seriously undermining his government. But he also spoke candidly about what he described as his failure and gave a frank assessment of his track record, as he prepares to run for re-election next year. He said he had achieved some but not all of his goals for Afghanistan.
"Afghanistan does not have a properly functioning government yet," he said. "With regard to corruption, it's a deeper problem, it's an Afghan problem. It's the problem of an inefficient government machinery. ... It's a problem of so much money coming into Afghanistan, it's a problem of the international presence."
It is now so dangerous outside the capital that Afghans are afraid to travel hundreds of miles of newly-paved roads, and most international aid groups have forbidden their staff to do so altogether. Truck drivers who have no choice often say thieves and thieving police are a bigger worry than the Taliban.
"An Afghan trucker put it succinctly: 'Forget the Taliban, our biggest problems are with the police,'" says Seth Jones, an analyst with the U.S.-based RAND Corporation and author of a report on the rise of Afghanistan's insurgency.
Afghan Interior Ministry spokesman Zemeri Bashery puts the corruption level at barely 20 percent of the force, and says efforts are being made to tackle it. But many Afghans think otherwise.
Kidnappings in Kabul are in the double digits this year, according to the attorney general's office, and Afghans suspect police involvement. Most are for ransom rather than because of politics.
In the meantime, the Taliban is advancing.
Moiabullah, a black-bearded Taliban from the troubled province of Ghazni, fled to Iran after the Taliban collapsed in 2001 but returned several months ago.
"People are fed up with this government," he says. "No one is working honestly. If you provide a good life, factory or jobs, of course no one will follow Mullah Omar (the Taliban leader)."
Out at the heavily fortified, sprawling U.S. military base at Bagram, north of Kabul, Brig. Gen. Mark Milley says the Taliban and al-Qaida are enemy number one, and corruption is enemy number two. But he claims the troops are inching forward in bringing security to the country.
"The western forces, international forces, Americans in particular are the most disciplined in our use of deadly force," says Milley, the deputy commanding general of operations. "We think we are succeeding."
Back at the tribal council, or shura, in Nangarhar, the eldest of the elders disagrees.
"It is a shame for them," says Abdul Samad, a tall, lanky man in his seventies with a silver beard on his gaunt face. "It was a good opportunity after the Taliban. But it is gone."
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
106 Comments so far
Show AllAfghanistan and Pakistan may very well wind up being America's Stalingrad. Certainly, a punch drunk dogface like McCain will take the bait and get us sucked in there even further. Read history, Herr Feldmarschall McCain. Fat chance!
How many Afghans were involved in 9-11?
If you mean how many Afghans were involved in piloting the four aircraft ... ZERO.
Groundbreaking journalism from Associated Press. Just a little late. About six years. And how many deaths later?
But at least Kathy Gannon has eyes and knows how to write about what is before them.
Joe
I'm sick of these ungrateful people! I mean America comes and gives them freedom and they complain. How pathetic.
I'm really annoyed about this. Why bite the hand that feeds you?
God can be banished. How? Check my blog.
www.dangerouscreation.com
Afghans fed up with own government?!
Since when the US installed goverment is Afghan people's "own government"?
By 2000, the US military had developed its plans for an invasion of Afghanistan. The objective was the installation of a pro-US government. Pipeline projects could then proceed and the US would be able to construct military bases in the very heart of Central Asia, projecting force against Iran to the west, Russia to the north and China to the east. All that was lacking was a justification.
September 11, 2001 provided it. In a still unexplained security stand-down, 19 Islamists—mostly Saudis—were able to hijack aircraft and fly them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon despite several of them being on CIA or FBI “watch lists”. The ability of Al Qaeda to carry out such an attack is all the more suspicious given the long relationship between American intelligence agencies and Islamic extremists. While bin Laden turned on his erstwhile US ally in 1991, it is unlikely that the CIA lost all its informants and agents in his network.
Within a month of 9/11, the US invasion of Afghanistan had begun. Nearly seven years later, the war has no end in sight. The Taliban have proven able to recruit guerilla forces on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border, feeding off the poverty and despair of a largely rural population and anger at the US invasion that has brought nothing but more death and hardship.
Read more: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/karz-s08.shtml
Do you think that the Afghans resented being freed from the Taliban's fundamentalist yoke in 2001? If so, you had better do some more reading. Quite the opposite was the case. While the coming of the Taliban was initially welcomed by the populace because it put to an end almost a decade of continuous civil war between the various mujahadeen factions (after the Russians pulled out)... they soon became tired of the grinding fundamentalist regime and the severe regimen imposed by them. There was genuine joy and relief when the Taliban were chased out - with the hope that they could Finally start to build a better tomorrow. And WE in the WEST pledged to the Afghan people that this time "We would not abandon them the way we did when the Russians left ... we would help them to rebuild." Maybe Rumsfeld didn't exactly promise that, but the British did.
As far as "invading" Afghanistan goes, the real problem was using Afghan proxies on the ground INSTEAD of committing American forces. The Taliban were mostly decimated by aerial bombardment while the Americans depended on the Northern Alliance and other groups to do the actual fighting. The reason Bin Laden got away was - again - because we were relying on proxy warriors to do the fighting for us to 'minimize' American casualties. There were American forces ready to go into Tora Bora but they were never committed.
What we lost ... was the peace (2001-2004) both because the Bush Administration was fixated on Iraq and because Rumsfeld would have nothing to do with 'nation-building' (reconstruction, infracstrucure etc.) in Afghanistan after the Taliban were chased out. By our negligence WE ALLOWED the Taliban to regroup and re-enter Afghanistan. Both the observations of Ahmen Rashid (Taliban, Jihad, Descent into Chaos) and Sarah Chayes (The Punishment of Virtue) bear this out.
Ah, but there in lies the error... sure, ok, perhaps the Afghan people didn't want the Taliban anymore... BUT, did the Afghani people ASK the US to come liberate them? Do they want the US there? The answer is no. So what gives the US the right to invade a sovereign nation? Bin Laden? That's the official lie... That only holds water if you believe the unbelievable "official" story of 9/11.
So what you're espousing here is American Hubris thinking that the US has the right to attack anyone it wants to because it is the sole superpower... frankly, that line of thinking makes me sick.
But remember we promised them we wouldn't leave in the first place.
Yes Thomas, but the US did leave... after creating a monster and setting it loose on the country...
So tell me, if the people of Afghanistan don't want you there, and they don't want you to fight for them, then why are you still there? There's NOTHING noble about the Afghan occupation Thomas.
Excellent! Thank you for a sensible post, one that is true and on topic.
Anyone remember this?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20011014/aponline135016_000.htm
"A senior Taliban leader said Sunday that the Islamic militia would be willing to hand over Osama bin Laden to a third country if the United States halts the bombing of Afghanistan and provides evidence against him.
President Bush quickly rejected the offer" I wonder why?. Hey, we sure got that poppy production back on line that the Taliban had shut down. They produce 50% more poppy than the world demand, must be saved for a rainy day.
Sudan had offered to arrest Bin Laden in 1996, but Clinton refused to accept him saying he had no case. Right. Um, conspiracy to commit a crime against the US is a crime. Right?. Remember the Bojinka plot that was foiled in 1995 and linked to Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Al Qaeda in Sudan. The money that financed the Bojinka plot came from Bin ladens group, and evidence of this was found in Yousefs computer which was captured in 1995. Yousef was later detained by the US and put on trial for his role in the first WTC attack.
Also, between 1994 and 1996, the USA supported the Taliban politically through its allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, essentially because Washington viewed the Taliban as anti-Iranian, anti-Shia, and pro-Western. Between 1995 and 1997, US support was even more driven because of its backing for the Unocal pipeline project. They were invited to Texas for negotiations in 1998, and these negotiations continued until August 2001 after which they were broken off, probably because we knew were going to have an excuse to go into Afghanistan real soon.
Both parties are in on it. We might be better off choosing our Presidents and Congressmen by lottery. Seriously.
Elisabet,
You do know that Obama wants to expand the Afghan War, continue the War on Terror, stay in Iraq, send "peacekeepers" to Georgia, and carry raids/bombing of Pakistan, right?
So please tell me what you mean when you say, "vote for our candidates"..."Then, we can withdraw from these CORPORATE WARS and get back to funding roads, sewage systems and education."
The propaganda used to justify the US-led occupation in Afghanistan typically leaves out any explanation of the origins of tendencies such as Al Qaeda, the Taliban movement and other Islamist groups resisting American and NATO troops. The spin merchants of the so-called “war on terror” would have people believe that the US and its allies are fighting religious fanatics who have no support in the country and are motivated by an inexplicable and irrational hatred of Western civilisation.
Read more: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/karz-s08.shtml
So, I'm hoping the popular power of the "Obama Effect" will come to bear on the Canadian election. I know that Jack Layton, our NDP leader, was in Denver. On the international level of awareness, the President is Obama and his running mate is the prime minister of Canada. The time is NOW for Black people and the WORKING CLASS to get organized, vote for our candidates and take back the PUBLIC PURSE on both sides of the border. Then, we can withdraw from these CORPORATE WARS and get back to funding roads, sewage systems and education. all the best, Liz
Rick A says: "The attacks on the WTC were a criminal act and the response should have been a police/FBI investigation and an attempt to capture those responsible (by the police). The response should not have been war."
That is the essence. If the goal were to find and punish those who carried out the attack, the investigators would have "followed the money" and used other normal police techniques in league with Interpol and all of the sympathetic people in the world at that time. Bush and Cheney really didn't give a hoot who murdered the office workers, police and firefighters.
The WTC attack was used as a pretense to trot out a war scenario, to create shock and awe, to continue to justify war contracting, to demolish democracy. The article describes the awful results of the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, WHICH WERE PREDICTABLE FROM DAY ONE. Anyone who still talks about finding the WTC attackers or accomplishing any other worthy goal by escalating our ham-fisted and clueless war in Afghanistan is speaking nonsense.
Joe
Good points Joe. I have several good videos about 9-11: One is "9-11 Revisited" by Dr. Steven Jones (911tv.org), another is "Loose Change" (http://www.loosechange911.com/blog/) and "9/11 The Myth and The Reality" by David Ray Griffin that point to the likelihood 9-11 was an inside job or at the very least was allowed to happen for the reasons you cite.
If you haven't seen them I would recommend them because they bring up a lot of questions about 9-11 and its cover-up.
"Either produce the bodies or SHUT UP...and I say that to every bleeding Heart Journalist in the world..."
Apparently, SnowWolf has the bodies of 100 Taliban insurgents in his/her garage. Creepy.
Nah...Just the ears
The American people, including McCain and Obama, still just don't get it. we're propping up a corrupt, autocratic. widely despised regime and slaughtering innocent people in a bid to kill "terrorists" as if there were a small, fixed number of them who can be eliminated, making the world safe for kleptocracy.
In fact, we create 100 anti-American radicals for every one we kill. Afghans don't have much allegiance to their country; tribe and religion count for more. We should have treated 9/11 as what it was, a horrendous crime by a small gang, and pursued and prosecuted them. Instead the ringleaders are still at large and we've killed over 4000 of our people and over a million Muslims, most of them innocent, and flushed $3 trillion down the commode of failed neocon theories.
Karzai, the erstwhile Unocal lobbyist, is so morally bankrupt that he appointed a convicted heroin smuggler as head of the anti-corruption agency. And we keep bankrolling a schizophrenic regime in Pakistan that sponsors terror against both our troops and India. We still haven't figured out that our natural ally in the region is India, not Pakistan.
Alex
If bin-Laden had nothing to do with 9-11, and repeated that via al-Jazeera, the AP, and the Disney Channel until he was heard LOUD in America on FOX, would that not DRIVE the question, well who did?
This would drive people into the truth movement, point to Cheney and undermine the neoCON's shadowgaming. Exposing Israel's involvement would please Allah, no?
So WHY does this not happen?
For the same reason we "can't catch him?"
Wheels within wheels.
Bombing from Afghanistan into Pakistan where 180 million Muslims live in a nuclear armed country sounds smart though.
9-11 was an inside job.
And poor Osama set up to take the fall.
How long until Zardari, elected yesterday, takes a stand on Taliban Chasing in My Country?
Well this is hardly news but it is good to see it printed, acknowledgment that the whole scheme was just that, a scheme with out a happy ending. Who says Bin Laden did anything? A tape which doesn't even look like him which gets released for public consumption just when the repugs need a ratings boost? I don't think so, I may not be from Missouri but, You gonna have to come up with something better than that.
It's to bad the Afghans are so bitter towards the soldiers, their bitterness needs to be directed specifically at a very few mericans, none of whom are soldiers. Soldiers should never be used to advance corporate ambitions, to use them as such must be considered a crime against humanity.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
Plus an interview, very clear, and obviously Bin Laden in which he says he did not do it..........lizard
The present issue isn't terrorists and 9-11. Afghanistan is the beachhead to the Stans where there's a whole whack of oil (ie also think back to Georgia). And then there's the squeeze play ( American troops acting like a vice between Iraq and Afghanistan)to isolate Iran from contact with most of the world.
That's why both Obama and McCain can agree wholeheartedly about the fate of Afghanistan.
For those who were all upset about the little cross-border raids into Pakistan the last few weeks...a bit of good news...looks like they are well worth it
Adam, We Hardly Knew Ye [James S. Robbins]
A report out of the U.K. speculates that Adam Gadahn, aka Azzam the American, the Californian turned al-Qaeda spokesman, may have been killed in a Predator strike in Pakistan. It would make sense if true. Gadahn had been very active producing videos under the As-Sahab banner since 2004, and there is a risk every time such a video is taped, edited and especially distributed that some mistake will be made that will leave clues back to its origin. Gadahn was known for his smug demeanor on camera (see this NRO review from January 2008), and his conceitedness my have been his undoing. Rumors of his death had been circulating since soon after the Predator strike early this year that killed senior al Qaida leader Abu Laith al-Libi. The fact that Gadahn has not yet appeared in a video mocking those who believed we got him is fairly good evidence that the reports are true. If he does not make one of his annual 9/11 commemorative videos this year I think we can cross him off the list. In 2005 he had said, "don't count on us demonstrating restraint or compassion." Right back at ya, Azzam.
So you are the resident barbarian? The foil for CD posters? cool....Not very good at it, though, are you?.lizard
&YYY&
The Vampire States is in Afghanistan to follow its religion of war on everything. Religion needs no evidence to support its beliefs. Acting on them is proof enough. A policy of no action is not understood. So if the VS believes it is doing well, then it is doing well. The same applies to the domestic policies of the VS. If the VS believes its own people are doing well, thats fine. Everybody is doing there jobs, its just the job definitions are iffy. Actual evidence of the declining state of nature and the overwhelming numbers of peoples is just too hard, and no one can do anything about it, without reducing living standards, changing the ways of life, or killing an awful lot of people.
Killing an awful lot of people is the VS job. The VS mission is to delay its own decay by bringing about of ruin any nation that can be invaded and therefore was much better off when left alone. The VS believe in endless war until our planet dies. VS warriors kill, so the choices for Afghanistan people are to become warriors, join, oppose or die. Judging by the limited success of the woeful sales approaches of the VS, I would say most victim peoples who still live to choose will oppose.
You are right. I believe any citizen of any country has the right to oppose foreign invasion/occupation by whatever means. What business does the US have in Afghanistan other than to colonize them for our benefit.
Like what are we doing there fight for freedom? Fighting for liberty? Yeah right! US needs to stop trying to dominate the world. We need to worry about our many pressing problems no anyone else's. We are the ones that create most of the problems anyway by interfering in others affairs.
These propaganda pieces about bombing weddings and shooting unarmed civilians are becoming WAY Tiresome
Either produce the bodies or SHUT UP...and I say that to every bleeding Heart Journalist in the world...
Show me that they are targeting civilians...or stop buying the enemies propaganda
Yeah these tiresome things could go away SnowWolf if the US would just stop killing civilians. Funny how that works. Seems to me that it's inconceivable in your mind that the US military could be killing civilians and committing war crimes... I guess it's your 30 years military experience that prevents you admitting it... You PARTICIPATED in it!
You and I both know these things have happened. Mistakes always do. Sit back, think about all this, get your persective back. I saw some things you said that I believe you said just because someone else said something silly.
According to my friend in the Canadian military, the US air force is notorious for bomb first, investigate later... anything that moves on the ground is considered a hostile target. Therefore, these incidents of the US dropping ordinance on civilians keeps happening. There is a strong disregard for the lives of civilians by the US military. It's not mistakes Thomas, it's wanton disregard for their obligations under the Geneva conventions to ensure the safety of the civilian population in war zones.
If you are going to play the role of opponent come up with better stuff. This is too obviously wrong. Make me doubt a little. C'mon be a good opponent! Use some finesse. Make it at least believable.........lizard
Oh Puh-leez
it wasn't a Taliban strategy meeting that got hit...it was...a Wedding Party...yeah...thats the ticket
Christ...and you guys jump on that Horse and ride it...unbelievable!
do a Google search on Gullible and they hyper-link this website
What gives the US the right to bomb the Taliban? What if another nation decided we are a bunch of right wing, zealous, warmongering fanatics that illegally bomb and occupy other nations and torture prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions and are lead by a war criminal that stole the last two elections and attacked us? What if we got attacked?
Do you think it's possible for others to see us as the terrorists? Is dropping 500lb bombs on civilian houses terrorism? For people like you this question never comes up. I'll bet you think the US should be judge, jury and executioner. Right?
You have a RIGHT MAKES RIGHT mentality. I'm sure you believe US is always right and is rightfully the world's self-appointed policeman. The US decides who are the "good" guys and bombs the rest. Right?
You are a typical Republican right wing nut without a doubt.
Your Soviet-style understanding of the role of the free press only embarrasses yourself. Likewise with the bellicose calls for enforced ignorance.
Wilful ignorance, while fashionable in parts of the mainstream, doesn't really contribute to an exchange of ideas in any meaningful way. It begs the question of what you think you're accomplishing here.
The Press is no longer a Watch-dog...its a Lapdog of the Democratic Party...
"its a Lapdog of the Democratic Party."
Hardly... If it was the Democrats lap dog, then why did the MSM fawn all over the Bush administration and aid in selling the big-lie to the public? The media is controlled by the corporate interest that also control BOTH political parties.
In the short time I have been coming to this site I have watched as your posts deteriorated from typical right wing rant to signs of a disordered personality.I do understand how much of a strain it must be to cope with the endless disclosures of incompetence, unfitness for office, criminal actions et al of those you defend, yet I wonder if it is worth it in the end?
If you continue to try and oppose common sense and the truth pouring out of every news source ( as much as they try to bury or distort it to favor the Bushistas) you will end up as a lonely and embittered old drunk, or worse. It may very well be too late.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Very good Snow wolf!! That is really funny!....lizard
Incorrect again, and also a diversion away from the point, which was your fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the press and your call for them to cease reporting on things you'd rather not acknowledge.
The news media are owned overwhelmingly by five multinational conglomerates. These corporations must, by law, act so as to maximize the profits of their shareholders. The press is a lapdog of money.
Your unsupported talking point is widely understood as simply false, but of course the radical right has no hesitation about lying so long as it serves the acquisition of power. In this case, it's called "playing the refs."
Risk the cramping: think.
Mmmm duh, is that the same money that's controlling the Democratic Party? By money here I mean the guy with the most money who 1/2 of the contributing comments on here now are apparently paid by.
Oh yeah, the MSM is forgivable for their treason because they were just doing their jobs... Yeah right! The dock for the lot of the knowingly fascist bass tards.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Methinks he's hit the bottle a bit early this day. He accomplishes a real purpose here, in my opinion. That is to show how really unAmerican, unfeeling, inhuman and foolish are our opposition....
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
But this is the good war. Let's stay another seven years and kill them until they learn to love us. Go Obama!
Don't worry. Barack Obama is going to "finish the job" in Afghanistan. Then those pesky Afghans won't be making any more noise (or moving or breathing). Of course that will be after he ends the occupation of Iraq "responsibly".
The government of Afghanistan was not behind 9/11. No Afghanis (or Iraqis) were among the 9/11 terrorists; they were from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Yemen. If Afghanistan was involved in 9/11, why is President Karzai on friendly terms with the U.S. and Bush? In addition, the al-Qaida training camp that just happened to be in Afghanistan was bombed and destroyed years ago. I thought killing civilians was a war crime. So why is the U.S. STILL there -- and STILL killing civilians?? Which reminds me -- has the U.S. built the oil pipeline through Afghanistan yet?
Readers interested in the background as to how we got where we are now should check out Ahmed Rashid's latest book "Descent into Chaos" which takes us from 2001 to the present day in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The US and NATO had (as the tribal elder stated in the last line of this article) a "window of opportunity" to do something positive in Afghanistan that lasted from about 2001 to 2004. But we didn't because Mr. Rumsfeld was against "nation building". So you overthrow the existing government and then what ... Another excellent book on this period is Sarah Chayes "The Punishment of Virtue"
Napoleon had it right when he stated (in his "Maxims") "Lost ground we can recover, LOST TIME, NEVER."
Thanks for the info on the book. I am interested in reading it.
Lisa
Other websites that you might want to investigate for pretty unbiased "feet on the ground" information on Afghanistan:
SARAH CHAYES: http://www.sarahchayes.net Carries a link to her interview on BILL MOYERS JOURNAL (February 22, 2008). This video can also be accessed directly from the PBS website. Having lived and worked with the Afghan people for the past seven years (based in Kandahar) she has very good 'insiders' view of what is going on.
ARTHUR KENT: http://www.skyreporter.com Canuck reporter who covered Bosnia, and the Middle East. Up to date capsule histories of Afghanistan during the Russian occupation and down to the present. Candid opinions on the coalition as well as the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of the Karzai Government.
For all those people making cracks about Obama be aware that McCain probably has no better solution than he does. The problem is that we have no co-ordinated and comprehensive plan of action that addresses the Taliban resurgence, the need to upgrade the government infrastructure AND provide meaningful assistance in reconstruction that shows tangible results to the long-suffering Afghan people.
How's this for a plan? Stop sending the double dealing thoroughly corrupt US installed Afghan puppet government massive cash that is obviously being used behind the scenes to arm a resistance, the Taliban, to kill and debilitate our US militia, as defined by the constitution.
Oh yeah, and bring our soldiers home and send them to arrest everyone who was in the congress, pentagon and executive branch throughout this woefully corrupt period, then enforce jury trials on all of them with a constitutional amendment and do away with "judges" apart from as a procedural facilitator.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
It seem that the "mindset" of the "Empire Builders" is fixed firmly on a thought that "we " are the exception. So they do not learn from the mistakes of History, and spend an inordinate amount of time and resources---repeating them.
The British did not learn from the Roman' who did not learn from the Greeks, and so on that Empire Building is a major contributing factor to the destruction of an "Empire". In order to "build and empire" the "builder" must meddle in the affairs of other nations. These endeavors have never been successful and never will in their present form.
If the USA, truly wanted to "promote democracy" in/to the world it would be sufficient to simply "LIVE THE EXAMPLE", the rest of the world would then wish to imitate the successful USA.
Instead the USA loves to meddle in the affairs of other nations---even while there own Nation is in a mess.
I do not believe that one Congressman from Texas--financed the "freedom fighters" that later became the "Taliban"----which gave rise Al Qaeda-----worked without Ronald Reagan's approval---even if he couldn't "recall" it. The USA has played to fools role in Afghanistan before---they do so now.
The USA makes enemies where ever they "meddle".
If the terrorists of 9/11 had simply wished to kill "infidels" they could have done the same thing in Mexico City, and killed a "million infidels"; but Mexico does not meddle in the affairs of other nations, the USA does.
The USA does not seem to even acknowledge the lessons of History---they believe " we are the exception to history's lessons"---but this has proved to be an absurd notion, that has cost the USA unimaginable wealth, prestige, and honor.
How many lives?
Instead of making the monument at "Ground Zero" the symbolic emblem of "We shall meddle no more", it inspired Afghanistan and Iraq----and more of the same "Empire Building".
In the case of Afghanistan and Iraq, the fact that more scholars have not reminded this administration that "history will reveal the fundamentalist Islam and Democracy are incompatible" therefore you waste your time in bringing it to them; is a shame beyond comparison.
You inspire a Jihad and you make yourself their enemy, and they love an enemy as much as the USA does. How many Americans are willing to strap explosives to their bodies and then detonate those explosives to kill their "enemies"?
Perhaps this is because they do not believe that they will be martyrs, and "eat Lamb in Paradise with George Washington"----not to mention all those "virgins".
To the USA : start "right here at home" make yourself the example that others wish to follow----not blow up.
do not believe that one Congressman from Texas--financed the "freedom fighters" that later became the "Taliban"
again you're right...it was CIA...and I know that one for a fact...just can't tell you how I know it
OH! You have the internet too?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
You are a freaking legend....in your own mind of course.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Thanks, good comments.
The messianic exceptionalism that infects USAns is indeed the force that drives them to commit so many outrages, and generate so much hatred around the world, while being utterly oblivious of what they are doing or how their victims feel.
But you have one error in your analysis - suicide bombings or other suicides in pursuit of a cause actually have little to do with the mythical 99 virgins, Islam or even religion. The secular Tamil Tigers use suicide bombings, and the IRA members who committed suicidal hunger strikes in Maze Prison were secular socialists (their Catholicism being largely a badge of nationalism rather than a religious adherence). The use of suicide tactics usually in cases of "lost causes" where one is outgunned by their adversaries. Of course, any time a tactic as desperate as suicide attacks are used, religion will have a role - Shinto for the WW2 kamikazes, Islam for Palestinians and the stateless terrorists.
You're missing something in your analysis. The doe ray me. For so many, it's about the money. Guys are taking orders to drive vehicles they didn't know were strapped with explosives. Some know they're going to die and are doing it because of as you said despair, though paired with knowledge their family will be paid for their suicide bombing... The reality is though, suicide bombing is not greatly characteristic of the resistance in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Roadside bombing and mortars are in far higher use. They're bravely fighting a fierce military, while our flyboy scumbags drop 500 pound bombs on whole neighborhoods. Who are the terrorists SnowJobWolfOverHisEyes?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Democracy Is Leavin
It’s leavin in free speech cages
From the board rooms to the catacombs
From mount Rushmore to Dubai
Democracy is leavin lots of places
using excusing phrases
to trade freedom for security
to feed non stop wars
and prop up corporate welfare scores
It’s leavin with devil prophesy
on John the fallen angel
as dead sea revelations scroll on
for all the monopolies of truth to ride on
from Jerusalem to Mecca to Lhasa
Democracy is leavin
It’s leavin with flowin black robed judges
On the bankers twin towers dust
the nine eleven shredder of epic proportions
with spores and anthrax scares
and preemptive false flagged wars
Democracy is leavin from the US of A
and lots of other places
most with US bases
in the suited empire of pen twisting plunder
from the occupation in the holy land
to broken Babylon in the fertile valley
and all those poppied stan lands
where joy or sorrow hides in burkas
and the body tally of the Taliban
bleeding as in culture wars
so markets rule while profit is no fool
as the corporate divide and conquer whores
look for more marks on further shores
Democracy is leavin
It’s leavin for the War of our bread and butter
as it writes the history for it’s end
say...
Is that ‘the end of history’ or the triumph of ‘the man’?
or is it free like masons justice
or just us ... the puppeteers for Uncle Sam?
and...
will end timers rejoice
from the new age corporate inquisition
can you be put to the question?
or will it be extraordinary rendition?
From Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo
Democracy is leavin
It’s leavin belly down on Enron towers
like an early frost on flowers
as more walls get built
for powers like the status quo
while the dust of olive branches
compliments depleted U and
Zionist atrocities
in the land that’s Holy
Democracy is leavin the US of A
and that ain’t all.... aeh
It’s leavin the maple leafed empire lite
and lots of other places
as trash talking media faces
speak between the spaces with bites
so trite we fail to note the bite was bought
So I guess Democracy is leavin.
Yah It’s leavin
but did it ever really get here?
Aside from possibly providing a certain degree of tolerance for Bin Laden's militants in their territory - in lawless areas which the Taliban would have had difficulty driving Bin Laden out anyway - the Taliban had nothing to do with Sept 11. They almost certainly were not aware of the particular scheme of the Sept 11 crimes, of which most of the planning took place in the US and Europe.
When Bush started threatening them, the Taliban leadership asked simply for the US to provide evidence of Bin Laden's role in the crimes, and they would capture him and turn him over. It sounded like a perfectly reasonable offer to me. The US should have at least taken up their offer - military action (against specific AlQueida targets - not the whole of Afghanistan) would always have been possible later if they reneged.
The brutal US military attack of a desperately poor state was an absolutely wrong and positively VILE response for what was an international crime by specific stateless individuals. It was done purely for domestic political reasons - to whip the US populace to a mindless frenzy of bloodthirstiness and consolidate Bush's fascist power. It worked like a charm. Even "liberal" friends who otherwise should have known better joined the vicious frenzy.
Me, I displayed a bumper sticker with a US flag composed of missles and bombs that stated "UNITED MY ASS!"
http://www.stickergiant.com/united-my-ass_ftn20.html
Please view this neat flick: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pPGm4M06_o
...
Obama should be forced to read this article. He is proposing an escalation in hostilities in Afghanistan in spite of the fact he posed as an antiwar candidate during the primaries and savaged Hillary for her vote for war. Obama has even admitted he wasn't sure if how he would have voted if he'd been in the US Senate at the time. My guess is that he would have voted for it. Obama has no record of bucking the system. He is a thoroughly conventional politician preaching "change" will embracing the failed policies of militarism of the Republicans.
Obama has not provided any evidence al Qaeda is in Afghanistan and that there we need to be fighting there. The Taliban didn't attack the World Trade Center on 9-11. Beside the whole framework of the GWOT is flawed because the criminals that attacked the WTC required a police action to hunt them down not a war against sovereign nations.
There is no moral or legal justification to be occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. Whatever happens in those countries is their business. The Chinese are violating the human rights of Tibetans and we aren't invading China. We only invade small, weak nations that have strategic geopolitical importance.
The fact of the matter is that Iraq and Afghanistan are colonies of the US and we are there to secure the resources of the area. It's about the oil. Period.
The fact Obama is trumpeting the war in Afghanistan and is saber rattling proves that on matters of imperialism he really not that different from McCain.
Obama: “We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator in the Afghan border region…etc.
It's terrifying and sad. The people will overthrow the "democratically elected" (wink, wink) Karzai. Too bad that we supported the Taliban, when the former USSR was there. Reagan thought that they were "better" because "at least they had a religion". Th original Taliban cam to the White House for lunch! Some say we were paying the Taliban right up to 9/11. ANOTHER reason to cringe when a politician mentions Reagan in "glowing terms". --He said, what asked by a reporter "Should the uS be supporting what many outside the country see as a theocratic terrorist organization?" he replied, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".I dont think the former term really has any relevance to anything (it has been so overused) and the later, is all a mater of opinion. The point is, the Taliban sdid not just form up and decide they hated the US. We decided to fight the "Cold War" there --on non-white soil.NOBODY won. And Bush/Cheney are just dying to start another one.
Woe to those who have oil, gas or pipelines in their country.
Good God! Let's get OUT!!!
tell you what...you surrender...I won't...how's your wife look in a burqa?
The people of Afghanistan are not trying to force their culture onto the United States. In fact, the Afghan people could care less about the US, with the exception of being occupied by them. So the Afghan war has NOTHING to do with preventing your "wife" from having to wear a burqa. That's just silly SnowWolf.
Are you really that unaware or are you playing a role? The idea that Afghanis want to force your wife to wear a burqa is stupid. The idea that they could is imbecilic. You aren't an imbecile so what gives?...patriotic denial?....Religious blindness?.....Likudnik?.......lizard
He's probably reacting to attacks from every side. Some of this is just silly.
Yes Thomas... it's very silly. But you have to question some of the positions our colleague SnowWolf takes on matters of the usage of US military power. Seems to me that SnowWolf has bought the official lies and feels the use of military force on the people of Afghanistan to be justified. However, SnowWolf is mistaken in his beliefs. It's understandable though with all the "worship of all things military" in the US right now. That's one of the precursors to fascism.
As annoying as I find SnowWolf's opinions sometimes, he does have the right to express them... and hopefully, one day, he'll have a revelation and change his tune.
He's obviously just one of the dumbest people on the face of the Earth. It's not even good propaganda. It would have been good propaganda for the Marine mindset prior to the invasion. At this point even jar heads wouldn't go for this. Having been there they would tell you it's not worth fighting over how distant foreign governments are run. New recruits might be so backward, but they'd be smartened up quick in a conversation with a senior marine which soon after boot camp they'd encounter.
He's trying to convince us there are really people as dumb as he's sounding, in America. I'm pretty sure that's his angle.
I think someone touched on this in an earlier comment. Even Afghani Muslims did not enjoy being ruled by the fascist Taliban who were propped up by US money, indeed to their last days in power. 41 million I think it was, was the money the US sent the Taliban in the summer of 2001, purportedly as a reward for eradicating opium. Obvious to me as a means to prepare to kill US militants, who will eventually become a threat to this outrageously corrupt US government.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
KeLeMi
I supported the invasion of Afghanistan because that country was behind 9/11. Bush let us get sidetracked by lying to us about Iraq. Now both countries hate us.
Let them hate us, so long as they fear us
How big is your fear, that you wish to be feared? If you were decent at anything you'd look to better yourself, earn respect, enjoy the affection that mates well being. You're obviously a scared little man, hostile, incapable, beat by your dad, ignored by your mom, who was never very good at anything and is now working for cheap to spew hateful propaganda on CD.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
It is Americans who are most fearful. And you. Easily fooled.......pathetic..................lizard
You , once again, demonstrate that you are sick little man.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Ardee, sometimes our more center-leaning liberal friends forget that the far-right is animated by hatred, greed, paranoia, and so on, all overlaid with primary certitude.
I'm calling you out as another propagandist. That guy is no far right fundamentalist. He's a plant from a psywar agency. Someone who had been thinking conservatism was super good and had their doubts so they came to CD to check it out, wouldn't bother commenting. They'd just read. Someone who was fiercely conservative and thoroughly propagandized wouldn't comment here on the article, they'd comment the comments, trying to swing people around to their point of view which would quickly be debunked in these parts. That guy, is just typing what some bunch of way out of touch nut jobs in the pentagon tell him to type. As it seems are you, that you're trying to swing people here against way far righty's. Like we're supposed to vote lesser evilism to prevent McTotallyInsane from getting in office, because the exit polls are going to be so far removed from the election results. ay?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Thank you for sharing.
The attacks on the WTC were a criminal act and the response should have been a police/FBI investigation and an attempt to capture those responsible (by the police). The response should not have been war.
The attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq should be classified as war crimes. If a gang of criminals rob a liquor store and kill the owner do you attack the entire neighborhood because they live there?
The entire war plan was planned by Neocons in the Project For A New American Century which was created in the 80s. They stated that absent a Pearl Harbor-like event the public wouldn't buy into war. Everything was planned out years ago. Some even think Bush allowed 9-11 to proceed in order to justify the war they wanted.
Obama's current saber rattling against Russia serves to rekindle the Cold War and justify the gargantuan military budgets the Democrats rubber stamp every year.
Obama on expanding the military: "We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.”
You cannot defeat the Terrorists with Law Enforcement...that was the Clinton Approach...and they only got stronger and bolder...and the end result WAS 9/11
SnowWolf who is a terrorist? Is someone opposed to US occupation a terrorist? Were the Taliban considered terrorist when the US backed them? Was Saddam Hussein a "terrorist" when he was on the CIA payroll? Was Saddam a terrorist when he gassed Kurds using gas we sold him and looked the other way? Were the Contras terrorist when Reagan was helping them? Is the US a terrorist organization when they blow up wedding parties and kill journalist in Iraq? Are the torturers at Abu Ghraib terrorist? Are George Bush and Dick Cheny terrorist?
Who decides who is a "terrorist" and who is fighting for freedom? The US?
I see you have completely bought into the imperialist notion that we are always the good guys, we have a RIGHT to interfere anywhere and at anytime, and anybody we fight against is a "terrorist" and has no right to oppose US occupation and US meddling in their internal affairs.
I bet you would fit rather nicely in the Republican Party because that is what they believe. Country First right?
SnowWolf is actually fiercely gay. He's young, has seen ultra stupid conservatives beat their children. Might have been kidnapped by the CIA. I'm guessing he does drugs, though not enough to damage himself badly. Typical CIA asset and low on the totem poll. What he does, and what he types, he does for cash. He is no ideologue.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Once again you ignore the truth of this matter, Wolfie. I do understand the enormous difficulties you face attempting to defend the indefensible, but take your crap elsewhere, it wont fly here.
When France was subjected to the terrorism of the Algerian freedom fighters ( terrorists to you) they used the police to great effect in curbing the domestic violence wrought by that element. When Great Britain was battling IRA terrorismn they used, not the military, but Scotland Yard to effectively battle the bombings and robberies. Today Britian still considers acts of terrorism to be matters for their police department and, as was shown by the recent train bombing, the police resolved the crime, arrested the guilty while our use of the military has wrought nothing but awful events and alienated not only Iraq and Afghanistan but all civilised people everywhere.
Of course, both military action, Blackwater and Homeland Security have reaped enormous profits for Bush friendlies, damn all the collateral damage. By the by, the first Trade Center bombings were handled as a police matter, while Clinton was in office and those responsible were arrested, prosecuted and reside in prison.
I fail to see why you lie like a rug, but , rather than loathe you I just feel sorry for you, desperate little fellow that you are.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I don't believe disagreement should be personal nor insulting. I haven't seen SnowWolf insult anyone or demean anyones opinion, unless I missed it.
SnowWolf believes attacking Iraq was the right thing to do, I don't, I think I can say you don't either, but that doesn't invalidate his, my, or your opinions on other matters.
Most of the time I agree with you, some of the time not, doesn't make me wrong or you right does it?
I must say Wolfie does believe in the use of force against backwards people. He doesn't yet realize he's among the backward.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
This is correct. Yet, still not ashamed of their little plot, the PFNAC has re-grouped, . I think it is called teh "Center for Am. Progress", or some such stupid thing.
You are incorrect on your first claim. The Taliban were merely loathsome theocrats (remind you of anyone?) who were quite happy to play host to Al-Qaeda. If you were paying attention at the time, you would have spotted the phrase "no distinction will be drawn" between those who committed the crime and their pernicious hosts. That was the Bush administration's justification for bombing the shit out of whomever in Afghanistan.
I like how you give yourself away with the us and themism.
The Taliban were caring parents and former farmers, most of them. Those are the one's that got the shit bombed out of them. There were of course some callous bureaucrats and stooges at the top of the heap. They were drug addicts, easily bought, raised with nil scruples and taught power is chiefest. A lesson they learned well and continue practicing.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Your comment is shy of coherence. Obviously, by "the Taliban" I was referring to those who ruled Afghanistan at the time.
May I ask what evidence you have to support your claim that Afghanistan was behind 9/11?
I'm just interjecting here because I do know that the WMD scenario of the Bush administration was fabricated.
In relation to Osama Bin Laden, the Taliban and the association with Afghanistan is "Osama was a warlord who assisted the Afghan rebels in their fight agains the Soviet accupation of their country. When the Soviets left, Osama returned home to Saudi Arabia."(p. 3-4) and when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Osama Bin Laden was outraged at the possibility that the U.S. forces might use Saudi Arabia as their homebase and was then ousted and took refuge in Sudan and then moved back to Afghanistan. Source: Bin Laden, C. (2004). Inside the Kingdom: My Life in Saudi Arabia: Warner Books: New York. (This book was written by Osama Bin Laden's sister-in-law who after many years was able to divorce herself from the family--she is certain that Osama Bin Laden was responisble for the attacks.
According to CBS news on Sep 7, 07: "As Osama bin Laden urges Americans to convert to Islam in a new video released Friday, the al Qaeda leader's location remains a mystery. But informed sources tell CBS News U.S. intelligence believes Osama bin Laden is hiding out in the Chitral district of northern Pakistan. A number of reports from human sources, including some alleged sightings, have put him there, reports CBS" Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/07/ eveningnews/main3243560.shtml. It has been difficult to locate Bin Laden, but sources also point to him as carving out a lair for himself in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The connection of Bin Laden and Afghanistan:
A former CIA officer, Johnson was deputy director of the U.S. State Department Office of Counterterrorism from 1989 to 1993. In this interview, conducted September 12, 2001, he explains why our perception of Osama bin Laden and his organization may be wrong, what we know about bin Laden's involvement in the 1998 embassy bombings and the 2000 USS Cole attack, and the degree of warnings leading up to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S.. He also states that: "..at the millennium, we know that [bin Laden is] holed up in Afghanistan. He is working with ideological sympathizers, some who have their roots with the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, some who have their roots with the armed Islamic group of Algeria. They've sort of merged together. Because although they come from different countries, they share a common vision of destroying the United States, eradicating the stain of U.S. influence that they view as sinful. And you've got to confront the sin by destroying it." Source: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/interviews/newjohnson.html
So, the only seemingly definate answers are that: Osama Bin Laden proclaims responsbility for the attacks on the U. S, we are not even sure he is still alive, and he is believed to be "holed up" somewhere between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
In support Of Obama who is often reluctant to provide black and white answers, because of the uncertainty or perhaps providing top secret information, he seems to but emphasis on both Pakistan and Afghanistan. I personally believe that Barack Obama will understand the cultural dynamics of various countries and will be more able to critically analyze evidence, rather than McCain who is hell bent on destroying anything that might get in his way and because of his alleged POW tortures, might not be the best candidate for making a rational decision.
So when so many Americans demand Barack Obama provide them with specifics today, remember, he may not be able to at this time and that his alliance with undercover and CIA will change when he becomes president and as you can see by this article that there are many influencing factors involved.
Anyway, my thoughts on the matter.
Lisa
Like how you left out that Bin Laden was on the CIA pay roll for his Afghan operation to defeat the Soviets. If you did a bit of that research on your own, surely you would have found that out in your first hour. It seems some agent is being spoon fed a can of wormed up crap.
More knowledge: The head of the Pakistani Intelligence Agency was the middle man through who the CIA would send Bin Laden his regular multimillion dollar pay check. Bin Laden is no ideologue, Bin Laden is money grubbing, a multimillionaire from a well to do family. Bin Laden's brother loaned George Bush Junior the money he used to start his first oil exploration business. Some of the people who were resisting the soviet invasion with Bin Laden were "ideological sympathizers". No one who was involved in September 11th was an "ideological sympathizer". Atta, "the ringleader", was partying it up in strip clubs like the self sacrificing suicidal muslim he was, right? 1 week before September 11th, the head of the Pakistani Intelligence Agency, THE guy the CIA was using to pay Bin Laden all these years, sent Atta 100,000 dollars that he used in preparation for September 11th. Bought stuff like parachutes and chloroform, set the plane on autopilot and saved a little to get plastic surgery after the whole thing was done...
So that's the Afghan connection to September 11th. From the CIA, to the Pakistani Head of Intelligence to Bin Laden, one Afghan immigrant. So we destroyed a nation of people and let the 1 immigrant there who had something to do with the crime slip out the back door. It was actually ordered that there be a stand down while Bin Laden and his chosen fled Afghanistan.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
No.... Bin Laden said he did not carry out the attacks on the world trade center. lizard
Ipso facto: the mullahs provided the cover for bin Laden to hatch his scheme.
Ipso facto: the arrogant ignorance of the Bush regime provided the umbrella of stupidity for bin Laden to actually succeed in his scheme.
May I ask what evidence you have to support your claim that Afghanistan was behind 9/11?
re-read. then take a deep breath and read again. perhaps a breath of fresh air, some food and water and a nice walk in the park might help.
we'll hope for the best for you. don't give up hope, you can beat this thing.
As I expected.
Troll.
Do your own research. Provide us with your results, go on: thrill us with your acumen.
Aside from possibly providing a certain degree of tolerance for Bin Laden's militants in their territory - a lawless areas which the Taliban would have had difficulty driving Bin Laden out anyway - the Taliban had nothing to do with Sept 11. They allmost certainly were not aware of the particular scheme of the Sept 11 crimes, of which most of the planning took place in the US and Europe.
When Bush started threatening them, the Taliban leadership asked simply for the US to provide evidence of Bin Laden's role in the crimes, and they would capture him and turn him over. It sounded like a perfectly reasonable offer to me. The US should have at least taken up their offer - military action (against specific AlQueida targets - not the whole of Afghanistan, would always have been possible later of they reneged.
The brutal US military attack of a desperately poor state was an absolutely wrong and positively VILE response for what was an international crime by specific stateless individuals. It was done purely for domestic political reasons - to whip the US populace to a mindless frenzy of bloodthirstiness and consolidate Bush's fascist power. It worked like a charm. Even "liberal" friends who otherwise should have known better joined the vicious frenzy.
Me, I put a bumper sticker with a US flag composed of missles and bombs that stated "UNITED MY ASS!" http://www.stickergiant.com/united-my-ass_ftn20.html
Please review this neat flick: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pPGm4M06_o
Thank you for interjecting truth into what was spiralling out of control apparently.
The Taliban offered to turn bin Laden over to any nation that would guarrantee there would be no death penalty handed down should he be found guilty. Of course, Georgie wasnt going to waste a perfectly good opportunity to become a war time President.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
No kidding! The suggestion that the Taliban or the Afgan's were behind 9/11 left me speechless.
Check back to...http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/07-1#comment-1024965 by the way.
When you have no answer, hurl insults, use sarcasm and scream troll.
Once again, where is the evidence that AFGHANISTAN was responsible for 9/11?
Once again, wretched Troll, the is no suggestion I've made that Afghanistan was directly responsible for 9/11, they merely smiled and conveniently looked the other way.
Your circular arguments are so facile, just like trolls defending Bush: if he's done anything illegal, he would have been impeached by now. He's not been impeached, ergo he's done nothing illegal.
Grow the hell up.
"Bush: if he's done anything illegal, he would have been impeached by now. He's not been impeached, ergo he's done nothing illegal."
Hmmm.... That's such a bad argument it's not even funny. Bush hasn't been impeached NOT because he hasn't committed any crimes, but because the "lawmakers" in the house and senate are complicit in his crimes.
Are you well? From whence your anger? Kisses, sweetie!
The Afghan's are not the only ones fed up with out corporate-controlled government. The only one's who appreiciate what 's going on in that area are the corporations and those who lick corporate boot.
They just don't appreciate having the world's largest minefield.