21 March 2010
By Chris Floyd
If you are an
American -- or indeed, any denizen of "Western
Civilization" whose security and values are supposedly
being "defended" on the far-flung fields of the Terror
War -- then take a good, long look at what is being
done in your name, with your money, by the
ever-surging Peace Laureate and his War Machine. From
The Times:
Covert
troops who killed two pregnant women and a teenage
girl in eastern Afghanistan went on to inflict
“cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” on the
survivors of a botched night raid, a report by the
UN said.
The family of the victims in Paktiya province have
accused Nato of trying to cover up the atrocity
after an investigation by The Times revealed that
two men, who were also killed, were not the intended
targets of the raid. One was a police commander and
his brother was a district-attorney.
...The report, written in the aftermath of the
February 12 attack, states: “As a result of the
operation, five people were killed, two men and
three women, all belonging to the same family.”
There were about 25 guests and three musicians at
the house on the night of the raid. They had
gathered to celebrate the naming of a newborn child.
It was only when a musician stepped outside to go to
the lavatory at about 3.30am, that someone flashed a
light in his eyes and he ran back inside shouting “Taleban”.
Witnesses said that Commander Dawood, the policeman,
was shot with his son, Sediqullah, 15, when they ran
across a courtyard. His brother, Saranwal Zahir, was
shot trying to protest the family’s innocence. The
three women were caught in a volley of fire behind
him.
They had
gathered to celebrate the naming of a newborn child.
They had gathered in a family home, in their own
country. They were not insurgents -- indeed, they at
first mistook the Guardians of Western Civilization
themselves as "Taliban," and sought to flee from them.
But they were caught, shot, killed -- in their own
country, in a family home, celebrating the naming of a
newborn child.
The Times has more:
The UN
report said that guests and injured relatives were
then “assaulted by US and Afghan forces, restrained
and forced to stand barefeet for several hours
outside in the cold”. “Further allegations were also
raised that US and Afghan forces refused to provide
adequate and timely medical support to two people
who sustained bullet injuries, resulting in their
deaths hours later,” the report added. ...
Waheedullah, 22, one of the guests at the party who
works as an ambulance driver in Gardez, said that he
was dragged across the compound by his hair. “The
Afghans said put up your hands. I stood up and I
don’t know who was behind me. I was kicked from
behind and fell over,” he added.
He saw a gunman with blond hair and a fair beard.
“They were American special forces,” he said. The
Afghan troops were using American rifles and wore
patches on their sleeves with the local phrase for
Nato’s International Security Assistance Force. The
Americans were wearing “wood yellow” clothes, he
said, which were different from the regular army’s
green uniforms.
An earlier
Times story on the incident reveals yet another
outpouring of the usual slanderous lies from the
occupation forces when one of their units has been
caught in an atrocity. The original story told by NATO
mouthpieces was that when the brave, unmarked covert
soldiers appeared in the dead of night to carry out
their courageous sneak attack on the sleeping village,
they found the women already "tied up, gagged and
killed." Then, while no doubt weeping salt tears at
such a disturbing sight, the bold, courageous sneak
attackers were set upon by "several insurgents," who
were then killed by return fire from the brave,
secret, non-uniformed night-stalking Defenders of
Western Values.
NATO claimed that the women "were victims of an
'honor' killing" -- that is to say, they had been
murdered by the dirty filthy primitive slaughterous
wogs who populate the ghastly reeking hellhole that
the Guardian Defenders of Civilized Western Values
have come to liberate and enlighten. But as the Times
drolly notes:
However,
they did not explain why [if it was an honor
killing,] the bodies would have been kept in the
house overnight, against Islamic custom, nor why the
family had invited 25 guests to celebrate the naming
of a newborn child the same evening.
The NATO
story was a brazen lie -- and was known to be
a lie when the mouthpieces dribbled it from their lips
like cud. There were no insurgents. There was no
firefight. There was only a policeman, his brother,
and three women shot dead in the middle of the night.
But that didn't matter. The most important thing was
that the first stories out of the gate on the atrocity
fixed the "honor killing" motif in the public
perception. (The miniscule portion of the public who
gives the slightest, merest damn about civilians being
killed in Afghanistan, that is.) Now, many weeks
later, the truth comes out, but who cares? It's in
some UN report, for God's sake, in a foreign
newspaper. Such things have no resonance, no purchase,
no meaning in the egotistical echo chamber of the
Homeland.
Anyway, don't you know there's a health care vote
coming up? Don't you know the most important thing in
the entire world is how this vote by a pack of cranks,
crooks and bagmen on a steaming mess of corporate
pottage will affect the precious political fortunes of
Barack Obama? I mean, my God, what if he only gets to
sit in the White House coddling billionaires, cutting
social programs and waging war for only three more
years instead of seven? Isn't that infinitely more
important than the lives of a few innocent people?
This, by the way, was the main argument offered by
Dennis Kucinich, when he abandoned his opposition to
the Obambazoole health care bill: "“We have to be very
careful that the potential of President Obama’s
presidency not be destroyed by this debate.” And he
said this just days after he had introduced a bill to
bring the Afghan War to an immediate end -- precisely
because it was a pointless, destructive exercise in
imperial power that was killing innocent people and
breeding hatred and blowback against the United
States. But in the end, it seems that "saving" the
power of the man who is directing and expanding this
murderous exercise is the most important thing -- as
long as he is on your side of the political fence.
Here one recalls the searing insight of Maxim Gorky in
April 1917:
"Politics
is the seedbed of social enmity, evil suspicions,
shameless lies, morbid ambitions, and disrespect for
the individual. Name anything bad in man, and it is
precisely in the soil of political struggle that it
grows in abundance."
II.
And who were these people killed by our tough, bold,
stubbly sneak attackers in their courageous, Homeric
assault on a sleeping village at three o'clock in the
morning? Afghans -- including a policeman -- who had
bowed to main force and thrown in their lot with ...
the Americans. From the Times:
An undated
document seen by The Times that was presented by US
forces to Commander Dawood, the dead policeman,
praised him for his work and “dedication and
willingness to serve the people of Afghanistan”. It
said he would “ensure the stability of your country
for many years”.
Commander Dawood’s brother, Saranwal Zahir, was a
district attorney in Ahmadabad district, also in
Paktia. The two married women were four and five
months pregnant. The teenage girl, Gulalai, was
engaged to be married this summer.
And what is the inevitable result of this magnificent
feat of arms in service of the values of Western
Civilization? The Times headline says it all:
"Survivors of family killed in Afghanistan raid
threaten suicide attacks."
Local
elders delivered $2,000 (£1,300) in compensation for
each of the five victims to the head of the family,
Haji Sharabuddin, after protests brought Gardez, the
capital of Paktia, to a halt. “I don’t want money. I
want justice,” he said. “All our family, we now
don’t care about our lives. We will all do suicide
attacks and [the whole province] will support us.”
...
“Before, when I heard reports of raids like this and
elders said [foreign troops] only came to colonise
Afghanistan, I told them they are here to help us,”
said Sayed Mohammed Mal, the vice-chancellor of
Gardez University, whose son Mansoor was Gulalai’s
fiancé. “But when I witnessed this in my family’s
home, I realised I was wrong. Now I accept the
things those people told me. I hate [foreign
forces]. I hate the Government.”
... “My father was friends with the Americans and
they killed him,” said Commander Dawood’s son, Abdul
Ghafar, as he held a dog-eared photograph showing
the policeman with three US soldiers. One of the
Americans had his arm around Mr. Dawood. “They
killed my father. I want to kill them. I want the
killers brought to justice.” ...
“The foreigners are always talking about human
rights. But they don’t care about human rights,”
said Gulalai’s father, Mohammed Tahir. “They teach
us human rights then they kill a load of civilians.
They didn’t come here to end terrorism. They are
terrorists.”
Of course, we
must excuse Mr. Tahir; no doubt he's a bit tired and
over-emotional. We all know that Americans -- by
definition -- cannot be terrorists. (Unless
they are Muslim-Americans, that is.)
Americans can only, at the very worst, make the
occasional mistake -- and that only out of
their admirably bumbling zeal to do altruistic good.
And naturally, Mr. Tahir is far too primitive to
comprehend the higher-order thought of Western
Civilization, which finds its most apt expression in
that elegant and subtle metaphor which encapsulates
the quintessence of our enlightened values: you can't
make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
We are sure that one day, when the omelet of a free,
civilized, enlightened Afghanistan -- happily
connected to the world by peaceful ties of friendship
and profitable networks of pipelines -- is finally
cooked, he will be happy that his young daughter will
be part of the sumptuous feast.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments