About Me

Name: Jamaal Long
Email: mavericknews@yahoo.com
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Blog Roll

 

Does the Time Photo Tell the World about Life for Afghans?

Posted by Jamaal Long on Monday, August 09, 2010 12:00:00 AM

Photo: New York Times

In a desperate attempt to promote continued bloodshed in Afghanistan, Time magazine put out a story of 18-year-old Aisha with her nose cut off by her husband, a member of the Taliban. The headline reads: “What happens when we leave.”

Not to belabor the point, but it is interesting that Time did not add a question mark at the end of the sentence. Almost as if the editors are stating that this will happen if the US and NATO forces pull out. The US media—pathologically committed, at times, to never putting anything in context—forgot to emphasize that the incident happened while US and NATO forces were there supposedly protecting the civilian population.

The WikiLeaks documents set off a fire storm, and the best way to put out the flames is for US officials, working in concert with the US media, to weave the apologia and proclaim that the war in Afghanistan will end with victory, but we all must focus on what our important objectives are—civilians. At least, for now.

There are several questions that those in favor of the war fail to address. What is staying supposed to accomplish and how does the military achieve that objective? The military’s job is to hunt down the enemy and kill them. They do not hold counseling sessions to help people with marriage problems or ask a person about their relationship with their mother. So how was a military presence supposed to prevent Aisha from being mutilated like she was?

Aisha was cut up by her husband who is Pashtun. He is obviously a very traditional man who embraces the ideas of Pashtunwali. They believe in revenge killings, and they believe that if a woman defames her husband, the man has lost his nose. Evidently, not wanting his nose to be removed, he cut his wife’s nose instead. Have there been any suggestions from the experts on Afghanistan on how to change someone’s belief system with a military? Are they to take down the names of the votary of Pashtunwali and conduct a commando-style-raid on them?

The US journalists have been trying to make the argument that the number of civilians killed by the Taliban, as opposed to US and NATO forces, is far higher. The discerning point that US audiences are supposed to accept is: the Taliban are, undoubtedly, more dastardly butchers that NATO. Even if the number of civilians killed by NATO is accurate, and there is every reason to believe that it is not according to the leaked documents, does that really matter to the civilians that are killed? Is it more acceptable to be killed at a wedding in an air raid by NATO fighter pilots as opposed to being killed by a Taliban?

Read entire article here: http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=1319

Why should anyone believe that staying there will prevent the Taliban from getting into power when legislation has already been passed that allows the Taliban the opportunity to be instituted into power? According to the National Reconciliation, General Amnesty and National Stability Bill, it will allow the Taliban into the Afghan government if the members agree not to take hostile actions against the current administration. It will even pave the way for “groups who are still in opposition” to not be prosecuted for possible war crimes.

Another point that goes missing is only the urban areas saw freedom for women after the 2001 invasion not the rural areas. Nahid Aziz, an Afghan-born clinical psychologist and vice president of Afghan Education for a Better Tomorrow noted:

“The women were allowed to go back and go attend to their jobs and go back to school and especially women in larger cities. But not so much the rest of women in Afghanistan … we’re talking about 40 per cent of the women, in general.”

Although US officials, US journalists, and commentators will never raise the point, an overwhelming majority of people in Afghanistan don’t even want NATO soldiers’ help. In an International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) survey it showed 74 percent believe working with foreign forces is wrong, and interestingly, 65 percent believe the Taliban and its leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, should join the Afghan government. However, a government submitting to the wishes of its citizenry would be democracy; clearly this isn’t what this war is about.

In a report by the Afghanistan NGO Security Force, an organization that monitors trends in violence, found that deaths of civilians rose 23 percent despite the claims from NATO officials not to harm civilians. According to the Guardian the report stated:

"We do not support the [counter-insurgency] perspective that this constitutes 'things getting worse before they get better', but rather see it as being consistent with the five-year trend of things just getting worse.”

So when Robert Gates says that there is blood on someone’s hands, he is correct, it is on his hands.

If the Time magazine cover picture is supposed to inspire military officials to care about the lives of ordinary people living in Afghanistan, why doesn’t international law?Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions says “in conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.”

Yet Afghans are ran over like road kill, they are sprayed on by bullets like raid is on roaches, and never once has Robert Gates or Adm. Mike Mullen been adamant about bringing anyone to justice for those crimes or went on a media blitz declaring someone was guilty of moral culpability?

If the Time magazine photo of Aisha can tell the world anything about life in Afghanistan it is simply this: US and NATO troops are as detrimental to the civilians as the Taliban and it is time for them to pull out.

Read entire article here: http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=1319

To submit an article visit: http://www.garrisondaily.com/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

US Media Downplay Deaths in Afghanistan

Posted by Jamaal Long on Monday, August 02, 2010 8:18:10 PM

WikiLeaks brings to light civilian killings in Afghanistan but US media respond dismissively

The Afghan protestors marched in droves toward the presidential palace in Kabul. 400 demonstrators inflamed with rage over the purported killings of 52 civilians by NATO airstrikes in the south.

Images of burnt, dismembered, lifeless bodies were depicted on the signs as they rallied, images that scarcely left a clue as whether the hapless victims were male or female, images that scarcely escaped resembling a human at all.

“They never care whether we are Afghans or animals,” a 26-year-old activist from Kabulnamed Samia told the Washington Post. Samia, like many in Afghanistan, have grown embittered over the presence of NATO soldiers in her country.

Grim episodes of combat have played out in the streets of her war-torn land for 10 years. The devastating realities of death and destruction have been known, but not to the extent that Afghans have had the misfortune of being familiar with. That was until the emergence of the over 90,000 documents obtained by WikiLeaks.

Although worlds apart, people in every country may now get an opportunity to get informed as to what goes on in the lives of Afghans like Samia. According to Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, the acts perpetrated against the Afghans are tantamount to war crimes.

“It is up to a court to decide clearly whether something is in the end a crime,” theIndependent reported. Though cautious about the contents contained in thedocuments, he then went on to say, “That said, on the face of it, there does appear to be evidence of war crimes in this material.”

Assange discovered, through his own analysis, that the documents revealed a higher civilian death count than what was officially reported.  He asserted that the US militarywent so far as to “downplay the number of casualties” what the documents show is that US military “redefine[d] civilian casualties as insurgent casualties.”

The Guardian, a UK-based newspaper that got the documents to review ahead of the WikiLeaks release, agrees with the analysis.  From a story published July 25, the article stated that disputed incidents of civilians killed are omitted from the report. The article drew the conclusion that of the total number killed—195 killed and the 174 wounded—that the military admitted to is underestimated.

The bloodshed wreaked by the military presence took its toll on the civilian population who the military was supposed to be protecting. The documents disclosed in plain view atrocious secrets that were once kept hidden, perhaps, what many wished were still concealed.

US soldiers spraying a bus with lethal machine gun fire and Polish soldiers mortaring a village and killing pregnant women at a wedding are just some of the tragic tales that were dragged into the light for public scrutiny.

“These files bring to light what’s been a consistent trend by US and NATO forces,” Rachel Reid a Human Rights Watch investigator told the Guardian, “the concealment of civilian casualties. Despite numerous tactical directives ordering transparent investigations when civilians are killed, there have been incidents I’ve investigated in recent months where this is still not happening.”

US media, an institution that is usually in an uproar over scandals such as Hollywood breakups, are slightly indifferent to the WikiLeaks revelation.  The exposure of the files is being portrayed as evidence that the troops should remain in Afghanistan.

Please visit us at:

 http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=1242

 

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), a media watch group, observed blatantly different retelling of the documents on civilians being killed.  FAIR studied the most prominent news sources in America. One was the New York Times which stated that all the civilians killed by NATO have been reported by the Times even though theGuardian said that in many cases the term civilian was swapped with insurgent.

Even CBS Evening News’ Lara Logan was viewed critically by FAIR. In one news peace that Logan did, she brought up the issue about the number of civilians killed by US and NATO soldiers as opposed to the Taliban. She also used the tally that theGuardian used, but she didn’t note that the total was not conclusive because of the omitted disputes by the military.

FAIR also observed that when the UN monitors calculated the 2,000 civilians killed they laid the responsibility for 41 percent of them squarely on the shoulders of US and NATO troops.

Washington Post’s writer Anne Applebaum patted the journalists in the US media on the back for staying a step ahead and reporting WikiLeaks’ contents before thedocuments came out. Essentially, Applebaum stated, like the Times, that the information was old news.

“If you don’t know by now that the ISI helped create the Taliban,” Applebaum began, “or that civilian casualties are generally a problem for NATO, or that special forces units are hunting for Al-Qaeda fighters, all that means is that you don’t read the mainstream media. Which means that you don’t really want to know.”

The writer for FAIR responded derisively, “It’s true that regular readers of outlets like the Post may be under the impression that Afghan civilian deaths are more of a problem for NATO than they are for Afghan civilians.”

Other American journalists believe that the civilian deaths are not an issue. An op-ed written Feb. 18 in New York Times even criticized the “overemphasis on civilian protection.”  The discussion being endorsed in the US Media is more troops not withdrawal, because if the troops leave, it could get worse.

As for Samia and many Afghans that demonstrated in Kabul, “We want NATO troops and American troops to leave Afghanistan. Even with their huge army, they couldn’t do anything in the past 10 years. And in the future, they won’t be able to do anything. The result will be just death and casualties and our innocent Afghan women and children will die.”

To read entire article or submit one, visit us at: 

http://www.garrisondaily.com

 

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

US and Israel’s Secret Weapon against Terrorism is Terrorism

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:55:01 PM


In the past few weeks, much consideration was paid to the subject of how Iran constituted as “the ultimate terrorist threat today.” As always, the focus of that topic centered on Iran’s alleged nuclear arsenal, how to deal with it, and what would happen if the country was attacked.

It doesn’t go unnoticed by those aware of United States and Israel’s blatant hypocrisy, but a willingness to wage war over a hypothetical danger constitutes the “ultimate terrorist threat today.”  Because of both nations leaders’ eagerness for war, any colorful rhetoric that depicts Iran—undoubtedly a liberty suppressing government—as the ultimate evil, will be used.

The discussion itself, coming from the alleged “good guys,” US and Israeli leaders, has an air of terroristic sounding rhetoric to it. How does one go about taking out Iran? Iran isn’t some individual held up in some criminal hideout. Iran is a nation made up of individuals that are associated with the country. The real discussion being had is how the United States and Israel can justify mass murder to prevent Iran from possessing nuclear weapons, something the United States and Israel refuse to give up. Once that objective is fulfilled, anything that follows will be seen as legitimate.

Recently, the New York Times reported that the deadliest terrorist attack Iran has had in years was pulled off by a Sunni militant group known as Jundallah, Soldiers of God in Arabic. A high-ranking Revolutionary Guards official was quick to name the United States, Britain and Israel as the culprits.

Undermining the Iranian government is a long-sought after goal for Israel and the United States. The question is: could either country be willing to associate with terrorist to accomplish that goal? According to The Sunday Telegraph, that is very possible.


Read entire article here: http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=1193


A source confirmed by the London-based newspaper said that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was giving “arms-length support” to Jundallah by supplying them with money and weapons to attack Iran from bases inside Pakistan.

Standard procedure for the CIA was to immediately deny the allegation, but US officials did confirm with ABC News that the CIA frequently advised Jundallah’s leaders.  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the al-Qaeda operational commander of the September 11 terrorist attack, was allegedly a one-time leader of Jundallah.

The association with Jundallah shows the depth of where both nations are prepared to venture. The leaders of both countries will pledge countless lives to fight terrorist, then turnaround and use terrorist to achieve their ends. United States and Israeli leaders will even emotionally terrorize their own population to get them to support a war with Iran.

That’s when media apologists, who love aggrandizing war and the state, come in handy. To heighten urgency and at the same add credence to the illogical assumption that violence is necessary to handle Iran, these sycophants commonly assert the “what if” argument. What if Iran has nuclear weapons, the argument goes, Ahmadinejad will launch an attack against Israel and wipe the country off the map. Then it would be too late to stop him.

Of course the argument is a ridiculous one. Nevertheless, it has been making its rounds in public debate. In practice, it could never be taken seriously.

To illustrate the point, an equally absurd argument would go like this. Suppose two people are walking down the street. One of the pedestrians feels threatened by a menacing look that another pedestrian gives him. Does he gun the glowering man down in cold blood, and then argue to the judge that the gaze was prescient of an imminent attack? Would his action be justified by merely declaring that had his assumption been right, it would have been too late to stop him?

By not limiting self-defense to specific criteria—clear, overt, and immediate—it allows both nations to attack with impunity any nation it desires.

United States makes the citizens of its respective country accomplices in its crimes. Taxpayers wouldn’t willingly pay for Israel’s and United States’ unmitigated villainies. However, through systemize theft, euphemistically referred to as taxation, citizens are coerced into paying for grand-scale criminality that the United States instigated, facilitated, or perpetrated.

Both nations’ leaders act as if they speak for each and every citizen in their country. They act as if their actions are legitimized through sacred writ of their nations’ laws. The reality is United States and Israel are a bandit gang writ large, capable of anything.


To read more articles like this or write one, visit this site: http://www.garrisondaily.com/

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

“This is our Land, Even if I am Killed”

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, July 20, 2010 8:47:43 PM


The sun has barely peeked over the village of Bani Salah as Mohammed Abu Tahma mounts his tractor with several members of his family sitting in the cart attached to thetractor. He cranks the engine up, the tractor rumbles to life, and the Tahma family proceeds down the unpaved road toward their field.

Tahma and his family are up just after daybreak to begin their perilous task of harvesting their crops. Frequently, when Palestinians go to harvest their crops, they are met with gun fire from Israeli soldiers. Tahama is aware of the threat.

“This is our land,” Tahma insists to an Al Jazeera reporter. “Even if I am killed, we will stay here forever.”

It is quite unusual for people to have to risk their lives merely for approaching a field they depend on for nourishment.  For people living in the Occupied Territories, an unusual life is what many Palestinians have to adapt to. Often, the farmers are scared away from their crops. Fearful of the potential of being pelted with live rounds, many farmers never return and land goes uncultivated.

Sitting in the cart with the women from his family are four members from the International Solidarity Movement. They have volunteered their time—and their lives—to protect the women as they work in the fields.

Unlike most protection that one would typically expect, their protection does not mean that they will be armed. In fact, no one making the journey is armed. They are all headed for an area that will have bullets cutting through the air just above their heads and all the volunteers will have are cameras and bullhorns.   The volunteers are essentially using themselves as human shields.

Tahma’s farm is located inside a buffer zone, which make his field difficult and dangerous to access. Palestine Monitor reported that roughly 7,800 Palestinians are presently ensnared inside the buffer zone.


Read entire article here: http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=1133



Other farmers living in the West Bank also face many complexities precluding them from working their fields. The stipulations that farmers have to surpass are first meeting security criteria, and then applying for an Israeli permit. The permit requires that farmers prove they have a “connection to the land.”

Farmers’ production has suffered because of the arbitrary opening and closing of the gate system that allows access to the land. As a result, large tracts of land have been left desolated.

Before, the harvesting was done with the luxury of machines. Now the women crawl across land uprooting wheat with their bare hands. It is a slower process that takes up an inordinate amount of time compared to what could have been accomplished had they had access to machines. For them, time is something they can’t waste.

Just beyond the buffer zone, 164 yards from the farmers, two Israeli army vehiclesapproach.  The Al Jazeera reporters continue their news story, but crouch down to avoid the gun fire. The automatic fire is discharged intermittently. The volunteers don’t move. Wearing a yellow vest to identify themselves, they begin video-recording the entire event.

Adie Nistelrooy, a member of the International Solidarity Movement, pulls out a bullhorn and tries to talk to gunmen. “. . . it is obviously a peaceful event. People get shot here for collecting wheat, or trying to farm their land. That’s not fair. That’s not right.”

Whether the Israeli soldiers hear his words, or understand his point of view is hard to determine. No one catches a glimpse of their faces. The Israeli soldiers clearly see them, though. Mounted on the watchtowers are cameras that monitored the farmers and volunteers.  It was plain to see that no verbal reply will be forthcoming. All the response directed their way is in the form of automatic burst from rifles several yards away.

The women try to obstruct the Israeli soldiers’ view of them by shielding themselves behind a bundle of wheat. The rest of the family nervously try to carry on with their work; their urgency is increased by the faceless gunmen nearby.

The gunfire starts again. The bullets fire in succession, one after another. The farmers and volunteers now begin to retreat from the area. The family members hastily grab whatever wheat they can and scurry from the area.

“Every day it happens like this,” Tahma protests, “even when we bring foreign volunteers with us. Israel deals with us the same way.”

To read more articles like this one or write one, visit this site: http://www.garrisondaily.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Shining a Light on the Problems caused by Gaza’s Power Outage

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, July 20, 2010 7:45:41 PM

A short-fall in revenue has lead to the power in Gaza to be turned off which could lead to devastating consequences if not addressed immediately

The sweltering heat marks the beginning of summer. The unforgiving radiance from the sun blazes down upon all those hapless individuals that fail to seek cover under anything that will spare them from the sun’s seemingly perpetual attack.

As night falls in Gaza, the sun—no longer perched high in the sky—is dethroned from its dominant position as its light retreats from the land, and everything becomes blanketed in darkness.

It is this darkness where many Palestinians have sat for more than two days due to power outages. The culprits, according to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights PCHR, are officials in Ramallah who neglected to pay to the full cost to an Israeli fuel company that is responsible for supplying industrial fuel.

PCHR also noted that the revenue needed to pay for the fuel was insufficient. Officials in Ramallah charged that the power company in Gaza failed to collect enough money to pay the bills.

Gaza Electricity Distribution Co. has urged in earnest for all the Arab countries to come to the aid of the people in Gaza and ameliorate their situation. The company has requested that the Arab countries finance the remaining balance and close in on thedeficit.

Gaza has only one electricity company, and it is barely able to scrape by and supply electricity in the area. It is only able to generate 137 megawatts of power for 1.5 million Palestinians, for which 300 megawatts is actually needed.

At little over a decade old, Gaza Electricity Distribution Co. has had its share of difficulties operating a business in the Gaza Strip. The members of the company are well aware of the devastating effects of a long power outage and what it could mean for Palestinians.


Read entire article here: http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=1055


When a similar situation occurred in the past, the Public relation and information manger Jamal Elderdisawi believed that it could have set off a humanitarian crisis. So much is dependent on the power plants to work that lives could be irreversibly damaged.

Without the power running, addressing the sewage system would mean “the only available alternative is to pump the dirty water into the sea waters, which will lead to serious environmental pollution,” Elderdisawi warned at the electricity company’s website.

The sea, with all its incredible vastness and seeming endless depth, proved to be no match for the fumes that the sewage emitted, and was unable to hold down the stench that an Al Jazeera report described as “unbearable.”

Other reactions arose from the gushing 20 million cubic meters of raw sewage that flowed into the sea. Samir al-Afifi, the director of the Palestinian Environmental Friends Association, told Al Jazeera that there was a correlation between eye infection, skin infection, ear infection and headache and the people that were exposed to the sea.

The effects of contaminated water have also etched its mark on the bodies of children in the form of skin rashes.

For infants, a risk to their well-being can be quite unsettling. With water that, according to Amnesty International, contains high levels of both saline, and nitrate—an organic compound often used in fertilizer—they are left at the mercy of their circumstances.

Science Daily has pinpointed the cause of the nitrate contamination. It is because of Gaza’s geology and partially arid climate that enables impurities to tunnel their way down from the earth’s surface and invade the aquifer system.

Gaza Electricity Distribution Co. is also confronted with the occupation itself. The company was once able to rely on the European Union as a source for supplying fuel into the area. However, the occupation imposed by Israel forced the EU to shy away from its support in Gaza.

Then there is still the problem of the lack of infrastructure. The area is in shambles. The land has been through constant bombings, constant waves of attacks, and constant fear of many more to come. The ability to rebuild has been deprived from the Palestinians because concrete is forbidden.

Just as the sun sustains all life on earth, the electricity sustains many lives in the hospital. Especially those that lie in bed suffering from chronic diseases as they do in Gaza.

Just as the sun inevitably rises the next day to chase away the darkness once more and restore light to the earth, it is the hope of Palestinians living in Gaza to rise the next day and have power restored to their tumultuous land.

Read more articles like this one or to write one, visit this site: http://www.garrisondaily.com

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Power and Politics Ingredients for Injustice?

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, July 20, 2010 7:36:27 PM

Wali Karzai’s reputation as drug trafficker and Hamid Karzai inability to rout out corruption may leave Afghanistan unable to make strides toward progress

Late on a Friday night in Baltimore, one might saunter expectantly into a restaurant called The Helmand to partake in the rich experience of Afghan Cuisine. An experience many of its customers have found immensely satisfying.

The billowing steam from the kitchen makes a sinuous trail through the air carrying with it a pleasant aroma of char-broiled marinated lamb or homemade pastry shells filled with onions and beef sauce.

The entrepreneur Qayum Karzai, the president of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai’s older brother, founded the establishment in 1998. Qayum Karzai was able to escape the desolation and violence that affected the lives of Afghanistan’s inhabitants. He is able manage quite a modest establishment, considering who he is related to. The Karzai name doesn’t carry with it the ability to influence circumstances as it does in Afghanistan.

The name Karzai may pass imperceptibly through the ears of the inattentive American listener not submersed in Afghan politics, but in Afghanistan, the name Karzai has a special meaning. Especially Ahmed Wali Karzai.

No one in Afghanistan reputation precedes them more like the president’s half-brother Wali Karzai. In the land that his brother rules Wali also plays a governmental role as head of the Kandahar provincial council. The media has dubbed him the “King of Kandahar.”

Like Qayum Karzai, Wali began in the restaurant business as well, 18 years ago. It was in Chicago’s Wrigley district where Wali Karzai prepared the many delicacies his culture had to offer.

It is ironic that Karzai got his entrepreneurial start in Chicago. It is the city known for political corruption and organized crime. The image of Chicago that was popularized in Hollywood cinema is the image that exemplifies Wali in Afghanistan.

News reports and government officials have illustrated a likeness of Wali that is similar to Al Capone—a real-life Chicago mob boss. Reports have Wali deeply engaged in narcotics distribution, an industry in Afghanistan totaling $4 billion a year.


 Read entire article here: http://www.garrisondaily.com/?p=591

 


The allegations leave a stain on the Karzai’s name. Furthermore, it raises the question of whether Hamid Karzai will take up the responsibility as president to rid his government from the malady of corruption.

Afghanistan has gone from being a nation ruled by the mujahedeen to the Taliban. Now, it seems that the warlords and the Taliban that have brought the people immense suffering may end up back in power, and the cycle will begin anew.

Hamid Karzai was touted as the man that would wrest Afghanistan from its caustic past and steer it toward a more promising future.

So when it came to tackling corruption in his own government, starting with his half-brother, he assuredly dismissed any claim of his wrongdoing.

“For the past five years, allegations have been there,” Hamid said in a Time magazine interview, “but never have they come to me with proof. My brother can easily be accused to put pressure on me…[He was accused of running drugs] precisely after I refused to allow aerial spraying of poppies.”

To the American officials, Wali is a necessary asset for them to operate in Kandahar, a reputed Taliban stronghold. Wali has been used to seek out those loyal to the Taliban. He serves as a conduit, in the same capacity that a confidential informant serves the police. Wali is a local for US forces who are outsiders.

Wali also aids in recruiting paramilitary forces that assist in conducting raids. It is in this capacity that has caused the most controversy.

In a documentary produced by Journeyman Pictures, independent distributor in London, a filmmaker uncovered some shocking details concerning the relationship between Wali and the paramilitary group.

The paramilitary group trained at a facility operated by the United States called Firebase Maholic, formally Camp Gecko, are said to carry out night raids and assassinations. One such assassination occurred when a paramilitary group descended upon a police station in Kandahar and demanded that some of their members be set free. Eyewitnesses said the police chief took a few steps and his assailants riddled his body with bullets.

These crimes are said to go unpunished because Wali Karzai shields them from the wrath of law enforcement. A senior prosecutor told the filmmaker that no case has been filed against him and even it was “it would be impossible to issue a warrant for him. He is above the law.”

Qayum Karzai and Wali Karzai embarked on entirely different journeys as entrepreneurs. While Qayum dines people with the savory taste of exotic food, Wali intimidates people with his unsavory reputation. Qayum enriches his customers experience and caters to them; Wali enriches himself because the political establishment caters to him.

To read more articles like this one or write one, visit this site: http://www.garrisondaily.com

 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Sad Saga of Sanctioning State Murder

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 10:17:05 PM

In defense of the Freedom Flotilla’s right to resist illegitimate aggression

The tragic events that unfolded on the Mavi Marmara marks another chapter in the harrowing tale of Israel and Palestine’s on-going conflict.  The attack left at least 10 civilians dead and several injured. The news reporters and bloggers have been scrambling to justify the Israeli commandoes actions.

The standard script the media have come up with is that the commandoes acted in self-defense because the people on the ship attacked them. The dialogue should be about self-defense, but whose right to self-defense?

The reports stated that the members of the flotilla were contacted and that they refused to let Israeli officials inspect their cargo. First off, the members of the flotilla were right to deny the request just as a person can refuse to let someone in that knocks at their door. The flotillas did not belong to the Israeli government and neither did the international waters that they sailed on. All the Israeli officials can do is simply request to board the ships.

Secondly, the Israeli officials did not have legitimate reason to suspect that any of the members were armed and planning to bring weapons to Hamas. On several occasions boats have tried to sail to Gaza and bring aid to Palestinians. Not once have Israeli officials reported finding weapons. Never have the media reported that the aid workers opened some of their shipment of goods to reveal their cleverly disguised weaponry and did battle with Israeli commandoes on the high seas.

Read entire article here: http://garrisondaily.com/?p=480

Israeli officials and their intelligence-gathering network could have applied some deductive reasoning. A boat of humanitarian workers was once impounded and taken to Ashdod, upon inspection, no weapons were ever found. Based on past experiences with aid workers sailing to Gaza, never has there been evidence to support claim that they would smuggle weapons to Hamas.

Arguing whether the people aboard the ship had weapons tries to give the Israeli government an acceptable accounting of their illegitimate behavior. Seeing how the Israeli officials have no concrete evidence of there actually being weapons, there was no reason for the commandos to be there in the first place.

It also ignores the fact that the Israeli government is a violent, aggressive institution that is indistinguishable, at this point, from Somali pirates. Who was to protect the people aboard ships from the violent impulses of a government who has been known to shoot down unarmed civilians and children who object to their criminal rule?

In a very feeble attempt to restore some credibility to the Israeli government, news reports stated that the members of the flotilla attacked the Israeli commandos with metal poles, knives and guns. The fact is irrelevant because the commandos’ reason for being there in the first place is illegitimate, and the attack came after the fact. The Israeli government’s initial concerns were weapons might be smuggled to Hamas, not to find out if the aid workers had the audacity to defend their property.

Suppose a robber knocks on your door and demands that you let them in so that they may rifle through your personal belongings and take whatever he desires. Suppose you refuse. Then the robber later returns, under the cover of darkness, and breaks into your house and guns you down and kills you when you try to defend your property. Can he tell the police he is the victim? The robber’s legitimate reason for being there in the first place would come into question, as should the Israeli commandos.

Finally, Gaza is still illegally occupied territory. The occupation is an ongoing criminal action perpetrated by the United States and Israel. No one sailing to Gaza should have to answer to any government about whether they can enter Gaza except the Palestinian government.  A Palestinian government should decide if humanitarian supplies like paper from aid workers posed a monumental threat to the lives of civilians.

Just as no one has to obey the dictates of a mafia-hood illegitimately controlling a territory in some city’s neighborhood, no one, then, has to answer to a criminally aggressive government.

There should be no forum to let Israeli officials explain themselves. What took place was murder. The commandos and those who gave the order should be in facing charges.

One would have to wonder if it had been the Iranian commandos killing humanitarian aid workers friendly to the United States and Israel at night, there probably would have been war by morning.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How the State Spawns Conflict Amongst the People

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, June 01, 2010 10:14:20 PM

While the belligerent governments of Italy and Arizona pass legislation criminalizing people based on appearance, it highlights a very important fact: states by their very nature are antisocial.

It also shows that governments are the main catalyst for racism. The state and the ideologues that serve it, are constantly inculcating the masses to adhere to one collective identity. It is the labeling of oneself one thing and another group of people another that serves as an ingredient for provincialism and prejudice inclinations.

Once people of any particular group or any particular nation develop terms to indentify other groups of people, then the members of that group will associate meaning to it.

Take for instance what it means to be Mexican in America. The meaning that many people associate with it is illegal alien. It is the dialogue that is most expressed on the television. Think of  what comes to mind when people think about Muslims. What terms are associated with it?

Another point to be made here is whether Italy or Arizona plans to accomplish anything by harassing its citizens. Suppose the person being stopped in Arizona for looking a little too Mexican is actual an American citizen but failed to bring the documentation with him or her to prove it? What might this person feel as he or she is being shackled like a common criminal and hauled off to jail? What might a Muslim woman, who is already seen as peculiar and look upon with disapproval because of how she lives her life, feel suddenly being fined for continuing that lifestyle?

How might the politician have voted had he or she been subject to that law? The core problem is state officials will not hesitate to pass draconian laws that they themselves will never be subject to. State officials do not possess the forethought to empathize with the citizenry and understand what it would be like to live under such legislation. Hence its antisocial nature.

Read entire article here: http://garrisondaily.com/?p=122

In a world with a decentralized, less pervasive government, there would be no arbitrary borders only private property. In a world without a government in a traditional sense, people would coexist harmoniously.

Imagine a person deciding to form a nation where there was none before and biding the minds of people to think and act as one collective unit. Think of how ridiculous this person would sound using the very same propaganda techniques used today.

“Men and women,” the would-be leader would begin. “I’ve gathered you all here today because I wanted to first show you this rectangular fabric. It is called a flag. We will hang it from that pole over there. Every time we have a special event we will all stand and revere it by singing to it.

“We will now, from here on out, be known as the nation of Sumschmucks. If anyone crosses our borders that I have mapped out and buys land and attempts to peacefully do business here, they will forcefully be shutdown. If they look and act in a way that displeases us, it is now considered criminal, and proper legal actions will follow.

“Now that we have established this nation, the second order of business is to have your sons and daughters enlist in the military and travel 7,000 miles to another land you didn’t know existed and fight and kill people you’ve never seen before. All this must be done in order to prevent them from someday taking our freedoms, of course.”

As the monologue attempts illustrate, it is the collectivization of the people by the state officials that forms the conflict between human beings. In a perfect world free of the state, there would be small communities administering their government were it would be more responsive to its people because it would truly be made up of the people.

In the event that people did come into conflict with one another, it would not be on the scale and scope that it is seen today. It would be limited to the parties of the original offense.

In a nationless world, understanding people would be essential. Without labels to give one a predetermined conclusion about ones nature, one would be forced to use his or her judgment to assess another’s character.

Read entire article here: http://garrisondaily.com/?p=122
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Demonstrators Defy Buffer Zone in Gaza

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 5:11:34 PM 

Campaign organizers showed up in southern Gaza to help farmers harvest crops                                                                                                                                                                                                   


By Jamaal Long 


Published: May 11, 2010







Hundreds of Palestinians
were mobilized and began marching toward the eastern
border of Khan Younis in southern Gaza. Their flags were blowing in the wind as
they placed them upon barbwire fences.

The demonstrators were united in defiance and chanting slogans denouncing a buffer zone that was nearby. Unlike past demonstrations were stones were thrown and tear gas was fired, the demonstrators had conspired to take on a completely different mission.

The goal that they set out to accomplish was to harvest crops for the farmers. The mission might seem like a small task, but farmers in the past have been shot at for trying to harvest their crops.

At a German Palestine Solidarity Organization gathering in Berlin, a coordinator for the Free Gaza Movement spoke about the actions that she and her group has taken in order to help farmers preserve their crops. She said that the group would go to the farmlands with bullhorns and video recorders to deter Israeli military from taken fire at the Palestinians. Even with the International Solidarity Movement by the Palestinians side, Israeli soldiers still fired at the Palestinians.

The Israeli authorities have issued reports declaring that the buffer zones and barriers that are erected are essential to Israel’s security because it prevents suicide bombings. However, there is another factor that goes largely unreported in Israeli officials’ analyst on how to disrupt terrorism that is how not to disrupt Palestinians’ lives.

Farming is essential to lives of Palestinians because it provides wages to Palestinians. If the land is not cultivated and harvested, that much needed income will not be made.   

With the restriction on movement in Gaza and Israel being completely off limits to the people of Gaza, finding employment has been a life or death struggle. In fact, trying to find work has cost some Palestinians their life.

Three teens believing that they could enter Gaza by slipping pass the Israeli Defense Force patrol made a fatal mistake that day. A 15-year-old Palestinian male was shot and killed. The two that were arrested and later released said that they had tried to enter Israel in order to find work.

When incidents like the one described take place, Israeli soldiers quickly assert that the individuals are killed because they are attempting to carry out terrorists attacks. That was the reason stated when five Palestinian men were killed when they tried to climb a wall in order to enter Israel. In this case no weapons or explosives were found, leaving the Israeli soldiers’ claim in doubt.

The massive unemployment in Gaza, which stands at over 50 percent, is so severe that the International Labor Organization says, “is putting the peace process under tremendous pressure.” Israel used to provide 100,000 jobs in Gaza and during the 1980s, rarely reached 5 percent according to Brookings Institution, a nonprofit public policy organization. 

A loss of employment is something that they Palestinians have been coping with for years now. The buffer zones add a whole new dynamic. When the buffer zones are created, any property close by is destroyed regardless of “specific threat” and regardless of it meeting standards for “military necessity” according to Human Rights report.

It is the hope of the demonstrators organized by Popular Campaign against the Buffer Zone that they can help the farmers harvest their lands so that they Palestinians can meet their bare necessities.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Villages Vandalized While Accountability Goes Unaccounted For

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, May 04, 2010 2:27:11 AM

Palestinians villages get burned down as settlers’ violence rages on

By Jamaal Long


Reports stated that Nancy Muhammad Yunus Bahar, 23, had just left the hospital. She was admitted because the tear gas that was launched into her home nearly suffocated her.

The onslaught that she endured was part of an ongoing offense caused by settlers from Karmi Tsur settlement. This settlement is situated in the area close the village of Beit Omar, north of Hebron. Beit Omar is where Nancy is lives. She, like many farmers in the area, became hapless targets for the settlers who destroyed 6 acres of land owned by the Palestinians.

By the time Nancy left the hospital with her husband, she probably hoped the violence had concluded and, upon returning home, she would find some solace. Before she knew it, another tear gas canister was hurtled toward her while she was in the car smashing the front glass. 

“In the past, only a few dozen individuals took part in such activity but today that number has grown into hundreds. That’s a very significant change,” Maj. Gen. Gadi Shamni told Haaretz, an Israeli newspaper.

The increase settlers’ violence has put not only the Palestinians on edge but also Israeli Defense Force (IDF). As a result, the Israeli Central Command are appointing an officer to oversee a crash course to prepare soldiers on how to deal with settlers.

The course, according to the Jerusalem Post, will include watching videos of past incidents in order to spot potential “flash points” and head them off. For more of a hands-on approach, live simulations will be conducted to learn how to confront and scatter demonstrators should they gather in the West Bank.

Interference from the IDF is met with extreme hostilities. In a strange twist of irony, the Israeli soldiers who have been seen as the defenders of the Jewish people, to the settlers, they are no more than plunders.

Dov Lior, a rabbi who is head of the Kiryat Arba settlement, has went so far as to compare Israeli soldiers to Nazis. The settlers have called for the soldiers to suffer the same fate as Gilad Shalit, and be kidnapped.

The settlers call this train of thought the “price tag” policy. If the settlements have to cease being built and evacuations are not halted, the settlers promise revenge by attacking the IDF and destroying Palestinian property. The more extreme positions some of the settlers have taken called on killing their enemies saying, “all should be slaughtered.”

The extreme positions are what concern the Shin Bet leadership. Settlers have adopted the path of giving into their most brutal impulses. They aren’t stopping their attacks with just mere stones; they are now inclined to use live weapons.

“They (settlers) don’t think like us. Their thought is messianic, mystic, satanic and irrational,” Yuval Diskin, Shin Bet security service chief told UPI.

Irrational and violent can prove to be a dangerous combination when your Palestinian and come into the settlers’ cross hairs. Palestinians have two problems to contend with: Israeli settlers and Israeli law. Many Palestinian homes are built in areas that are not “recognized.” Therefore, if their homes get burned down, new structures can’t be built unless Palestinians can obtain the all-too-elusive permits.

Something must be done to stave off attacks says Pinchas Wallerstien, former Yesha Council Chairman. He feels the attacks against IDF and civilians are unforgivable.

“There must be an explicit message so that people know that if they commit acts of violence they will not be supported.... ‘Price tag’ will bring us all devastation.”

For Palestinians like Nancy, the “price tag” that settlers have unceremoniously laid upon her has made her a victim twice. With the only saving grace is it didn’t cost her life.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Israel Continues Construction of Separation Barrier in Hebron

Posted by Jamaal Long on Sunday, April 25, 2010 5:55:47 PM
By Jamaal Long

The Separation Barrier, to many Palestinians, is seen as a towering reminder to what is tantamount to life inside an open-air prison. The structure consists of barbed wire, electrified metal, and a watchtower, where snipers are positioned.

Recently, the Separation Barrier’s imposing presence is being felt as the structure springs up with one located between Yata and Hebron and another between Ezna and Hebron.

Once completed, the Barrier will extend 425 miles. The goal for the structure, according to Israeli officials, is to prevent suicide bombers, however, the Barrier doesn’t just prevent death of Israeli citizens but life for ordinary Palestinians.  

One of the ways it obstructs the life of everyday Palestinians is through the destruction of property. In a style modeled comparable to the Berlin Wall, the Separation Barrier has watchtowers situated every few hundred miles with “buffer zones” on either side. If property is unfortunately located in the path of these buffer zones, they are laid to waste.

With a staggering 46 percent living below the poverty level, trying to maintain consistent income is an overwhelming task.

For many Palestinians, farming is a primary source of income. But the construction of the Separation Barrier has led to new restrictions on movement, which makes going to these lands to cultivate them difficult. As a result, marketing produce for that much needed income would be hindered and could push more Palestinians into poverty.

“Our biggest concern is that farmers are increasingly not being allowed access to their farmland located west of the barrier,” UN official Allegra Pacheco told BBC News.

The complicated system of permits where one has to prove land ownership, in addition to the Israeli military limiting the movement to these farms, puts Palestinians in a untenable position for land confiscation.

Palestinian land ownership is rooted in the tradition of the Ottoman Land Code of 1858. During this time, the Sultan was owner of large areas of fertile land but granted them to farmers as long as they were cultivated. When the occupation of the West bank began in 1967, Israeli government assumed the power of Sultan and the farmers’ land that was not cultivated was subject to confiscation.

Israeli officials have said that the purpose of the Separation Barrier was to prevent suicide bombers. But when the number of terrorists attacks declined three years in a row from 2002—the height of the Intifada—the Barrier was not acknowledged as the cause.

Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security service, and the Israeli Defense Force told Haaretz, Israel’s daily newspaper, the reduction was due to their ability to act against terrorist organizations and prevent their attacks.

B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, doesn’t believe the purpose of the Separation Barrier had anything to do with Israeli security. They contend that the purpose is really about annexation.

According to B’Tselem once the Barrier is completed 60 settlements in the West Bank will be situated on the Israeli side.

Their website states: “It is reasonable to assume that, as in the case of the settlements, the Separation Barrier will become a permanent fact to support Israel’s future claim to annex additional land.”

The illegal annexation of land is why the issue has been so controversial. A point that The International Court of Justice has raised:

“The construction of the wall being built by Israel, the Occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated regime, are contrary to international law.”

For Palestinians living in the West Bank, the Separation Barrier has impeded everyday life; international law has done little to ameliorate their circumstance.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Lethal Legacy of Henry Kissinger Revisited

Posted by Jamaal Long on Tuesday, April 20, 2010 4:36:33 PM
By Jamaal Long

 

September 11 was a devastating blow to a sovereign nation. It left an economy wrecked, freedom of speech was eliminated, a brutal regime was installed into power, and absolute terror and bloodshed followed.

These events described above, to some, may seem unfamiliar. That is because the scenarios depicted are not about the chain of events that occurred as a result of the attack on the World Trade Center Towers in New York. It is in reference to September 11, 1973, when a US-backed coup d’etat ousted the elected leader Salvador Allende and replaced him with General Augusto Pinochet.

Unfortunately for those that were involved in the coup, who would like that event to stay buried in the passed—locked away in a tomb to remain unfamiliar history—the nefarious act is making news again. The episode in particular relates to a feat of international terrorism committed right in Washington, D.C., fourteen city blocks from the White House.

The target was Orlando Letelier, an outspoken critic of Pinochet’s human rights violations. Letelier was a problem for both the United States government and the Chilean government. For the United States officials, they couldn’t let the world know that it was supporting a government responsible for some 4,000 to 10,000 murders.

The solution was simple. Taking a page right out of some gangster movie, Michael Townley, an American-born terrorist operating on behalf of Pinochet, fastened an explosive device to the chassis beneath the driver’s seat of Letelier’s Chevrolet Chevelle. Using an electronic paging device, the bomb was detonated. Letelier died later at George Washington University Hospital. Ronni Moffitt, wife of Letelier’s assistant, drowned in her own blood on the curb next to the car when shrapnel pierced her jugular.

It is a grisly tale of cold-blooded murder that made US officials culpable. As it turns out, some US officials knew that international murders would transpire. One official in particular was then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

Inter Press Service, a global news agency, reported that instructions to US ambassadors in Latin America’s Southern Cone that warned against carrying out international murders were canceled five days before Letelier and Moffitt were killed. Kissinger declared, “….no further action be taken on this matter.”

Kissinger, a man of no moral integrity whatsoever, operated his governmental position in the same way Al Capone ran the mob in Chicago. Never mind vicarious liability that would be legally assigned to a private individual. Kissinger caused those murders to occur. By canceling the order, he set in motion a chain of events that allowed innocent people to be murder. It is not like the US did not have influence in Chile. After all, it was the United States that took the attack dog Pinochet off a leash.

It would be irrelevant to wonder if Kissinger knew of Letelier and Moffitt’s assassination in advance. The demarche that Kissinger canceled was to head off “a series of international murders,” therefore, Kissinger knew someone would die.

Kissinger, well-insulated within the State apparatus—immune from the institution that should be prosecuting him—expressed an absolute contempt for human life. He supplied arms to the Chilean military who drowned victims in vats filled with urine and excrement and inserted rodents into women’s vaginas.

Kissinger was unconcerned with human rights. He simply scoffed at such moralizing decrees. He even dismissed the “silly human rights question” with his own staff.

“I read the briefing paper for this meeting,” Kissinger began, “and it was nothing but human rights. The State Department is made up of people who have a vocation for the ministry….I hold the strong view that human rights are not appropriate in a foreign policy context.”

The harsh reality is, whether the general public in America will admit it, that the US government has incessantly been the eradicator of life, the suppressor of liberty, and the pursuer of its own selfish ends. If the US was seriously endeavoring to pursue an altruistic quest to rid the world of terrorists, it should start in Washington, D.C.

Chile is another example among many on how the United States government defiantly undermines any sovereign nation it so wishes. It is also another reason why US involvement around the world should come into question.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Stone-Throwing Gets School Surrounded As Tensions Rise in the West Bank

Posted by Jamaal Long on Thursday, April 15, 2010 1:35:20 PM
By Jamaal Long
 

The Israeli occupation forces were in full battle gear. Three militant vehicles approached Yasser Arafat’s school in Azzun located east of Qalqiya.

The soldiers moved to surround the school. The reason for the sudden engagement: the soldiers claimed that rocks were thrown at their tanks while they were at the main street near the town.

Rock-throwing is an offense not taking lightly by Israeli military. If found guilty, the maximum sentence is 20 years in prison.

Confrontations between Palestinians and the Israeli military have increased in the past months, spilling over into multiple locations. The relentless unrest led the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) to seal off the West Bank on March 29 and opened it back up again on April 6—which is the time of the Jewish Passover.

The causes for the confrontations were due to plans to build 1,600 new settlements in East Jerusalem and the announcement to renovate two new holy sites. What fueled the anger about the renovation news was that it was seen as commemorating Buruch Goldstein who killed 29 Palestinians and injured 150 more in Hebron 16 years ago to that day, in that very same city the sites are to be built.

When children participate in the clashes, the reprisal from the Israeli authorities is harsh. Two days of airstrikes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem followed after continual altercations the children had with soldiers. 

If the children are not dealt with at the site of the incident, then more stealthy means are employed. B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, investigated cases in the Silwan neighborhood, in East Jerusalem, where children were whisked away in the middle of the night.

The children were arrested for throwing rocks.

Israeli Security Agency, with assistance from the border police, took the minors (Palestinians ages 16 and up are considered adults under Israeli military law) from their beds, cuffed their wrist, and interrogated them at a compound.

The compound is where the interrogation turned violent. B’Tselem reported that interrogators beat and threatened them. Out of the four that were taken, one was forced to stay an extended seven days.

To avoid further violence with civilians, the IDF Central Command is making a policy shift by changing its rules of engagement in the West Bank, The Jerusalem Post reported.

Before, Israeli soldiers would fire their weapons when rocks or Molotov cocktails were thrown at them. Now, according to new guidelines, soldiers are not allowed to shoot so much as a warning shot in the air if someone throws a rock. If a Molotov cocktail is about to be thrown, the soldiers are under strict orders not to shoot.

One Israeli defense official told The Jerusalem Post, “The fear is that violence, shooting and casualties will stymie Israeli and Palestinians’ efforts to improve the situation on the ground in the West Bank.”

Situations that involve schools being surrounded are something the Director of Yasser Arafat’s school, Majid Odwan, would like to avoid. But he calls on more than just a policy change on behalf of Israel to deter confrontations between children and Israeli soldiers. He calls on the international institutions to intervene.  

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

New Bill Betrays Commitment to Fight Lawlessness in Afghanistan

Posted by Jamaal Long on Friday, April 09, 2010 10:55:19 AM
By Jamaal Long 



The president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, has vociferously spoken in condemnation of NATO’s and US forces military engagement that have claimed the lives of innocent civilians. But when it comes to crimes officials in his government have perpetrated against these very same civilians, it left one Afghan incensed.
 
 “Who is Karzai to forgive the deaths in my family?” Sakina demanded. “Was his home looted? Was his son killed? He has no right.”
 
Sakina’s outrage is in response to the National Reconciliation, General Amnesty and National Stability Bill, which some organizations call blanket amnesty for war crimes, including torture.
 
One such organization is International Center for Transitional Justice. This group has noted that the bill belies President Karzai’s 2006 commitment to pursue justice and fight impunity.
 
The commitments this bill hopes to accomplish are “ending rivalries and building confidence among the belligerent parties.”
 
To the dismay of Afghans like Sakina, the result is amnesty for war crimes committed by the very same people who took part in creating the bill.
 
A glaring example of how the bill vindicates past crimes is in Article 3, paragraph 1. It states:
 
“All political and hostile parties who were involved in a way or another in hostilities before establishing the Interim Administration. . . shall not be prosecuted.”
 
A further cause for concern is the subsequent paragraph, which states that “groups who are still in opposition” to the Afghan government could benefit from the resolution. According to Afghanistan Analysts Network, that could potentially pave the way for protection from punishment of future crimes.
 
How could legislation like this pass when President Karzai was adamantly against it?
 
The bill was approved by parliamentary majority in 2007; the next step was to have the president sign it, then publish it in the gazette before it could take effect.
 
Step two never took place.
 
Instead of having the president sign the bill, it went straight to the gazette. The action taken made the president’s signature unnecessary. It also proved to be politically advantageous for getting around unfavorable legislation.
 
In an article written by Crimes of War, a private, non-profit corporation that writes about international humanitarian law, they stated, “lower house of parliament can override presidential objections with two-thirds majority vote pursuant to Article 94 of the Afghan Constitution.”
 
The Afghan Constitution may allow for the bill to pass, however, the Trial Chamber of The International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia declared amnesty for torture was prohibited.
 

Prosecutor v. Anto Furundzija

“… perpetrators of torture acting upon … national measures may nevertheless be held criminally responsible for torture, whether in a foreign State, or in their own State under a subsequent regime.... In short, in spite of possible national authorization by legislative or judicial bodies to violate the principle banning torture, individuals remain bound to comply with that principle.
 
Afghanistan has been a country wrought with turmoil for four decades, beginning with the Soviet invasion, then the Mujahadeen’s bloody reign, then the Taliban. Now, apparently, even they are getting a pass.
 
“He wants to give the Taliban money, land and privileges,” Sakina cried. “To me, a victim, he gives a widow’s pension of 300 afghnis a month [$6].” 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Americans Continued Carelessness Toward Civilian Casualties

Posted by Jamaal Long on Monday, March 15, 2010 2:01:15 PM
By Jamaal Long

One would think as American citizens and taxpayers, that when the nation goes to war the public would want to take notice to the people being killed for their “freedom.” After all, it is the taxpayers that foot the bill, so there is vicarious responsibility.

One would think that President Barack Obama, as commander-in-chief of the United States military, would give more consideration to the possible civilian casualties when ordering bombing campaigns. Because there aren’t any bombs in existence that only hit bad guys and miss good guys, the most advanced military in the world should be insuring civilian safety.

Maybe Obama’s failure to acknowledge such incidents is indicative of his lack of interest or concern. The same goes for the general public who are too preoccupied with trivial matters to see their president in action.

Protecting civilians isn’t some minor importance in this glorified game of mass murder called war. Safeguarding civilians is of paramount concern for the United States who is high-contracting party to many customary laws of war. 

Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions clearly tells contracting parties “in conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.”

And yet, when Obama ordered the attack on Yemen in December 2009, very little observation to the laws of war seemed to have concerned him.

If anything can be gathered from the details after the attack, it shows that, perhaps, Yemenis’ lives aren’t of any importance. The attack left 34 Al Qaeda members dead. However, in terms of proportionality, it is a small fraction compared to the 82 civilians killed and 213 that were injured according Yemen local sources.

Yemen Times reported that among the—what military officials would callously call—“collateral damage” were women who were pregnant.

“Do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects … but are military objectives. . .” the law states.

These damning allegations were never acknowledged nor investigated. President Obama, evidently, had more pressing matters to attend to. Without even getting confirmation on the civilian lives that were snuffed out, he quickly congratulated the Yemeni president for a job well-done on the “strategic move.”

It is the same scenario played out over and over again. Allegations of people—that’s people not insects—being slaughtered and no investigation is conducted, when it should be. One should be conducted, if anything, to vindicate the United States by exposing a possible lie, to show that US officials aren’t merciless killers, and that “strategic moves” included precautions against civilian causalities.

Since Obama has been in office, civilian deaths in Afghanistan have increased 24 percent compared to 2008. Even on the day of Obama’s Nobel Peace prize ceremony, 12 civilians from a single family were killed.

Keeping with the tradition of disregarding human life, right before the assault on the densely-populated area of Marjah the best advice that could be given to the 100,000 civilians was: “Keep their heads down.”

Again, international law clearly states:

“. . .an attack shall be cancelled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one …or that the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.”

Is that the way to win the hearts and minds of the people of Afghanistan? By leveling their neighborhoods to the ground and leaving dead, innocent civilians strewn across the streets? It doesn’t help the United States’ case when the world reads reports of NATO soldiers gunning civilians down even while their hands are in the air shouting at them to stop.

A military’s sole objective is destruction. It can’t be viewed as organization that can be used to safeguard civilians in any meaningful way. It is not a doctor armed with a scalpel working with surgical precision. It is a butcher armed with a meat cleaver hacking away at what lies in front of him.

Working with civilians is something that the military appears poorly equipped to do. Matteo dell’ Aira, a medical coordinator of the Emergency Lashkar Gah hospital, told Amy Goodman of DemocaryNow.org that coalition forces are actually preventing civilians from reaching the hospital.

The medical coordinator was very clear on what he told Ms Goodman. He said that ninety percent of the victims were civilians, and of that ninety, thirty percent were children. 

In the name of freedom, have innocent non-American lives become expendable? Has the broadcast of civilian lives being destroyed been reduced to mere sound bites in order to not disturb Americans’ psyche who are more infatuated with ballgames to pay attention?

 Nothing short of a public outcry will force these operations to subside. The deaths of these civilians are not just the results of the military in action, they are the results of the general public’s ignorance in action, as well.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12Next »