Why don't you come up and see me?

The leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan are over in Washington visiting Obama. When the emperor calls, all tremble and obey.

He's very, very sorry about the 100+ civilians killed by U.S. air strikes. Not as sorry as the Afghans, I bet.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the escalating civilian casualties?

Record bombs dropped in Afghanistan in April

"Air Force, Navy and other coalition warplanes dropped a record number of bombs in Afghanistan during April, Air Forces Central figures show.

In the past month, warplanes released 438 bombs, the most ever."

Meanwhile, Stephen Harper decided to make a surprise visit to Afghanistan.

Surprise! Glad to see me?

I didn't like the sound of this much, though. He's thanking the U.S. for their "help".

"...I believe ... we will have the numbers we need to begin what we really hope is irreversible progress," he said.

"...Remember friends, before you came here, the Taliban ran this country, Afghanistan, like a medieval gulag," said Harper. "Those dark desperate days are ending."

Something irreversible has happened, alright. I don't think it can be described as progress. The dark, desperate days are just beginning.

The CTV story had this headline:

PM goes off base during surprise Afghanistan visit

One thing...Harper is always way off base, no matter where he is.

Meanwhile, reports are coming out (this one from 2006, so gawd knows what's happened since then) of U.S. interrogators killing dozens of detainees and then covering up the evidence.

US interrogators may have killed dozens, human rights researcher and rights group say

"United States interrogators killed nearly four dozen detainees during or after their interrogations...In all, 98 detainees have died while in US hands. Thirty-four homicides have been identified, with at least eight detainees — and as many as 12 — having been tortured to death..."

"...[M]ost of those taken captive were killed in Afghanistan and Iraq. They include at least one Afghani soldier, Jamal Naseer, who was mistakenly arrested in 2004. “Those arrested with Naseer later said that during interrogations U.S. personnel punched and kicked them, hung them upside down, and hit them with sticks or cables,” Sifton writes. “Some said they were doused with cold water and forced to lie in the snow. Nasser collapsed about two weeks after the arrest, complaining of stomach pain, probably an internal hemorrhage.”

"...[A]nother Afghan killing occurred in 2002. Mohammad Sayari was killed by four U.S. servicemembers after being detained for allegedly “following their movements.”

"...“Nagem Sadoon Hatab… a 52-year-old Iraqi, was killed while in U.S. custody at a holding camp close to Nasiriyah,” the group wrote. “Although a U.S. Army medical examiner found that Hatab had died of strangulation, the evidence that would have been required to secure accountability for his death – Hatab’s body – was rendered unusable in court. Hatab’s internal organs were left exposed on an airport tarmac for hours; in the blistering Baghdad heat, the organs were destroyed; the throat bone that would have supported the Army medical examiner’s findings of strangulation was never found.”

"...In another graphic instance, a former Iraqi general was beaten by US forces and suffocated to death. The military officer charged in the death was given just 60 days house arrest."

Getting the job done in Afghanistan

When I was a child with two younger siblings, my parents used to refer to the more "solid" aspect of toilet training as "doing a job". Ever since then, any variation on that phrase when used by anyone brings that bodily function to mind.

Here's Obama "getting the job done in Afghanistan" and self-confessed war criminal Condoleezza Rice urging Canadians on to "finish the job" in Afghanistan...way back in 2006 when she graced Canada with her presence.
-----
Getting the job done in Afghanistan

U.S. strikes in Afghanistan kill 100, mostly civilians

Although the Obama administration doesn't appear to possess the cojones to actually prosecute the torturers and torture enablers, at least some Stanford students and alumni have the guts to ask the tough questions.

When Condoleezza Rice came to Canada on the fifth anniversary of September 11, 2001, she visited Halifax, one of the many airports in Canada that allowed American planes to land after the NYC and Washington DC hijackings. None were allowed to land at U.S. airports. (I've often wondered if the situation had been reversed and Canadian planes had asked to land in the U.S. whether they would have been received with such welcome. Three guesses on the answer to that one, and the first two don't count.)

There was speculation that Peter MacKay, the defense minister, and Condi were "an item". (He really, really likes powerful women. His former girlfriend was Belinda Stronach, a Conservative MP and the gazillionaire daughter of the car parts magnate Frank Stronach. She dumped him and crossed the floor to join the Liberals after she found out just what the neo-Con Harperites were up to).

The thought of Petey and Condi canoodling is enough to make most people lose their breakfast. Just cast your mind back to those heady days when the relations between the Canadian Harperites and the Bush Cabal were supposedly warming up...as if this were a good thing.

So, here's a video of the Peter and Condi show in Halifax.

Don't watch this unless you have a bucket handy.

Catch the last sentence from Rice, extolling the neverending war in Afghanistan.

"Maybe it won't come back to haunt me or Peter, 'cos we will be gone, but it may come back to haunt our successors and their successors. You have to finish the job when you have a chance."

Peter and Condi sitting in a tree (from 2006)

I hope something comes back to haunt you, Condi.

Crapaganda, torture and a Department of Peace

The incomparable Bill Blum in his latest Anti-Empire report has blasted the last U.S. administration's use of torture and the present administration's unwillingness to do anything about it.

Bless you, Mr. Blum.

"When George W. Bush said 'The United States does not torture', everyone now knows it was crapaganda. And when Barack Obama, a month into his presidency, said "The United States does not torture', it likewise had all the credibility of a 19th century treaty between the US government and the American Indians...."

"...[I] could really feel sorry for Barack Obama — for his administration is plagued and handicapped by a major recession not of his making — if he had a vision that was thus being thwarted. But he has no vision — not any kind of systemic remaking of the economy, producing a more equitable and more honest society; nor a world at peace, beginning with ending America's perennial wars; no vision of the fantastic things that could be done with the trillions of dollars that would be saved by putting an end to war without end; nor a vision of a world totally rid of torture; nor an America with national health insurance; nor an environment free of capitalist subversion; nor a campaign to control world population ... he just looks for what will offend the fewest people. He's a "whatever works" kind of guy. And he wants to be president. But what we need and crave is a leader of vision."

Our only alternative to the objectional Stephen Harper as Prime Minister of this country seems to be someone else with no particular stand on anything.

Linda McQuaig has a few suggestions for him. He'd win in a landslide if he actually adopted these policies and carried them out. It's what Canadians want, after all.

But I'm a "dreamer...nothing but a dreamer...".

A peace plank for Ignatieff

"...[P]rime Minister Stephen Harper stands for many things, mostly unpleasant, like trashing struggling artists and allowing unlicensed gun owners to roam the nation. But Ignatieff has avoided positioning himself, excepting of course his earlier endorsement of the U.S. invasion of Iraq -- for which the freshly crowned Liberal leader has been trying to elegantly extricate his foot from his mouth for some time."

"...[W]hy has one sector -- the war sector -- been given a commitment of 20 years of spending increases, while so many other vital sectors will be facing cuts, Ignatieff could ask daily in the Commons."

"And he'd have Canadians onside. A poll commissioned by the finance department before last year's budget showed that Canadians ranked increased military spending as their very last spending priority among 18 possible options. (This explains why Harper chose to announce his "Canada First Defence Strategy" plan on a government website during the slow-news time slot of 4 a.m.)"

"...[A] decision by Ignatieff to challenge the Conservative drift toward militarism would do the country -- and the world -- a service, while also making him seem less of an empty vessel."

Canadian Obama

Looks like some other people don't think Canada's options for a government are looking too rosy. We either have a hawk or...a hawk.

Here's the new boss, same as the old boss.
-----
Canada's Obama and the Cult of the Prof

By Eugenia Tsao

Bill Blum's letter to Obama

Anti-war and anti-empire activist for many years, Bill Blum has a letter for Obama. Will he read it? Will he carry out any of the suggestions? He doesn't hold out much hope, in particular because Obama has already authorized bombings in Pakistan, a blatant act of war, which killed civilians and enraged the whole area.

And he did it within a few days of taking office.

Doesn't look good...

In this piece on the reach of the American empire, and how it's destroying the world and its own country, there are a couple of notable bits for Canada, why it toadies to the U.S. and why it is so lacking in morality, intelligence and ideas as to elect someone like Stephen Harper to run the show:

...Afghanistan

Perhaps the most miserable people on the planet, with no hope in sight as long as the world's powers continue to bomb, invade, overthrow, occupy, and slaughter in their land. The US Army is planning on throwing 30,000 more young American bodies into the killing fields and is currently building eight new major bases in southern Afghanistan. Is that not insane? If it makes sense to you I suggest that you start the practice of the president accompanying the military people when they inform American parents that their child has died in a place called Afghanistan.

If you pull out from this nightmare, you could also stop bombing Pakistan. Leave even if it results in the awful Taliban returning to power. They at least offer security to the country's wretched, and indications are that the current Taliban are not all fundamentalists.

But first, close Bagram prison and other detention camps, which are worse than Guantanamo.

And stop pretending that the United States gives a damn about the Afghan people and not oil and gas pipelines which can bypass Russia and Iran. The US has been endeavoring to fill the power vacuum in Central Asia created by the Soviet Union’s dissolution in order to assert Washington's domination over a region containing the second largest proven reserves of petroleum and natural gas in the world. Is Afghanistan going to be your Iraq?


NATO

From protecting Europe against a [mythical] Soviet invasion to becoming an occupation army in Afghanistan. Put an end to this historical anachronism, what Russian leader Vladimir called "the stinking corpse of the cold war." You can accomplish this simply by leaving the organization. Without the United States and its never-ending military actions and officially-designated enemies, the organization would not even have the pretense of a purpose, which is all it has left. Members have had to be bullied, threatened and bribed to send armed forces to Afghanistan...

The Prime Minister without a soul

'Exterminate all the brutes': Gaza 2009

By Noam Chomsky
January 21, 2009

Read it and weep.

That the Harper regime, in the name of all Canadians, could be supporting the Israeli government in its brutality and butchery makes me sick.

Backing the wrong side - again

If anyone is unsure just how incompetent and out of touch the present Canadian government is, nothing proves it more than than Harper and Co.'s penchant for backing the wrong side - the Bush administration, the Howard government in Australia, and now standing against the world to support the Israeli slaughter in Gaza.

Canada votes alone for Israel

"Canada stood alone before a United Nations human rights council yesterday, the only one among 47 nations to oppose a motion condemning the Israeli military offensive in Gaza."

Thirteen nations abstained.

This is nothing new for the neo-Con Harper regime, though. They must have really big financial backers among the pro-Zionist faction.

Harper conflates the criticism of the Israeli slaughter of penned-up Gazans with anti-Semitism. The nasty little neo-Cons like to use this particular line of thought. I guess they haven't heard that an argument is lost once it compares anything to Hitler and/or Naziism to make a point.

But that doesn't stop Stevie.

Criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic, Harper says

MIKE DE SOUZA, Canwest News Service

Published: Friday, May 09 2008

"...[I] guess my fear is what I see happening in some circles is (an) anti-Israeli sentiment, really just as a thinly disguised veil for good old-fashioned anti-Semitism..."

But the (former) public safety minister, the profoundly ignorant Stockwell "Doris" Day, had already signed a statement of support for Israel, whatever that might mean, after denying he had done so. Lying is not a good thing for a nice evangelical boy to do, Stockwell. But anything for King Stevie, no?

14/11/07

"Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day's office yesterday confirmed that Canada is negotiating a non-binding co-operation agreement with the Israeli government covering counterterrorism and homeland-security matters."

Since when did Canada start having "Homeland" security?

Just in case Canadian soldiers get tired of getting killed in the Afghan quagmire, there's always Israel.

I'm so damn mad, my thoughts are all over the place.

Dying to protect a pipeline

Gordon Prather on the reasons behind the wars that are killing our soldiers and impoverishing our citizens.

We die and go broke. The oil companies and their enablers make big bucks.

Regime Change Rationales by Gordon Prather

Quoting Eric Margolis in an article:

"Meanwhile, according to Pakistani and Indian sources, Afghanistan just signed a major deal to launch a long-planned, 1680 km long pipeline project expected to cost $ 8 billion. If completed, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline (TAPI) will export gas and, later, oil from the Caspian Basin to Pakistan's coast where tankers will transport it to the west.

"In 1998, the Afghan anti-Communist movement Taliban and a western oil consortium led by the US firm UNOCAL signed a major pipeline deal. UNOCAL lavished money and attention on Taliban, flew a senior delegation to Texas, and also hired a minor Afghan official, one Hamid Karzai.

"Enter Osama bin Laden. He advised the unworldly Taliban leaders to reject the U.S. deal and got them to accept a better offer from an Argentine consortium, Bridas.

"Washington was furious and, according to some accounts, threatened Taliban with war.

"In early 2001, six or seven months before 9/11, Washington made the decision to invade Afghanistan, overthrow Taliban, and install a client regime that would build the energy pipelines."

Stop killing the Taliban

Stop killing the Taliban – they offer the best hope of beating Al-Qaeda
By Simon Jenkins in the Sunday Times

".....All hope was buried in a cascade of hypotheticals. Victory would be at hand “if only” the Afghan army were better, if the poppy crop were suppressed, the Pakistan border sealed, the Taliban leadership assassinated, corruption eradicated, hearts and minds won over. None of this is going to happen. The generals know it but the politicians dare not admit it. "

"...[T]hose who still support the “good” Afghan war reply to any criticism by attempting to foreclose debate. They assert that we cannot be seen to surrender to the Taliban and we have gone in so far and must “finish the job”.

This is policy in denial. Nothing will improve without the support of the Afghan government, yet that support is waning by the month. Nothing will improve without the commitment of Pakistan. Yet two weeks ago Nato bombed Pakistani troops inside their own country, losing what lingering sympathy there is for America in an enraged Islamabad. Whoever ordered the attack ought to be court-martialled, except it was probably a computer. "

"Seven recent books on relations between Al-Qaeda and the Taliban ...[s]cream one policy message: do not drive Al-Qaeda, set on crazy world domination, into the arms of the Taliban, set only on Pashtun nationalism. Do everything to separate them. Western strategy has done the precise opposite."

"...The Taliban’s chief objective is not world domination but a share of power in Afghanistan. While they cannot defeat western troops, they can defeat Nato’s war aim by continuing to build on their marriage of convenience with Al-Qaeda, which supplies them with a devastating arsenal of suicide bombers. "

Soldier playing "quick draw" in Afghanistan

Spotted this today:

Charges dropped against soldier over alleged ‘quick draw’

“The Canadian military has abruptly ended court martial proceedings against a soldier from CFB Trenton, Ont., who was charged with playing “quick draw” while serving in Afghanistan.

Cpl. Sterling Strong was charged in 2007 with three counts under the National Defence Act after allegedly refusing to stop playing “quick draw” in his sleeping quarters at the Kandahar airfield.

…The military hasn’t given a reason for why the charges against Strong were dropped.”

Playing “quick draw”? What the hell are they? Kindergarteners?

And then my grab-bag mind reminded me of this case.

Dear god. If they are related, they can’t just let this drop.

Canadian soldier’s body on its way home

“The body of a soldier [Kevin Megeney] from Nova Scotia began its trip home from Afghanistan on Wednesday, while investigators
continue to probe how his death occurred at Kandahar Airfield.”

A doctor serving in Afghanistan wrote about it without disguising the soldier’s identity and in detail.

Completely thoughtless. Hope he learned something from it, but probably not. Probably thought he could do a M.A.S.H. type thing out of it, with him in the leading role.

Canadian Controversy Over Mother Jones’ Article of a Doctor’s Account of Cpl. Megeney’s Death: The Editors Respond

“This 7,000 word diary of Dr. Patterson’s time serving at the military hospital at Kandahar Air Field culminates with a scene in which Dr. Patterson (a Canadian) is on call when Canadian Cpl. Kevin Megeney, who’d just been accidentally shot by another soldier in his own tent, was brought in to the ER. Cpl. Megeney arrived unconscious, his pupils fixed and dilated. Dr. Patterson and the other doctors at hand tried to do what they could—including opening his chest with a “clamshell incision”—but the bullet had entered his heart.

“…The controversy started when the The News—a community paper that serves Pictou County, Nova Scotia, where parts of the Megeney family live—reported that George Megeney, Cpl. Megeney’s uncle, was upset that Dr. Patterson described the methods used to try to save his nephew, and did not disguise his identity…”

Dead soldier's father says "the war is stupid"

The latest soldier to die in Afghanistan, Captain Jonathan Snyder, fell down a well during a night training patrol for Afghan soldiers. They probably knew the the countryside better than he did. Although the Canadian military is trying to put a good spin on this, saying that he saved other soldier's lives during an undefined firefight, there is no good way to put this.

His father said it best. "The war is stupid."

I agree, Mr. Snyder. It isn't worth the life of your son and the grief it has brought to your family and his girlfriend.

I don't know why we're there either.

I'm very sorry he had to lose his life.

Cdn soldier dies after falling into Afghan well; father says 'war is stupid'
By Murray Brewster, THE CANADIAN PRESS

"...The soldier's father, David Snyder, told The Canadian Press from his home in Penticton late on Sunday that his son was a "sensitive, intelligent, tough young man who loved his job and loved soldiering."

The grieving father said he supported his son and the Canadian military, but not Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

"The war is stupid. Maybe it's necessary at times, but there's all sorts of things to consider.

"I ask the members of Parliament 'Is it worth the sacrifice of their children' " asked the father, adding that his ultimate question is "Why are we there?"

Canada's New Defence Chief - everything the U.S. wants in the Canadian military

Since NATO is interested in constructing a railway in Afghanistan to move stuff around more cheaply, Canada's new Chief of Defence Staff has the necessary qualifications from the time he was fighting in Iraq.

From the United States Army News Service:

Golden spike finishes Iraq’s national highway

"The golden spike ceremony was patterned after one in Utah 135 years ago when the world’s first transcontinental railroad was joined in Promontory Point. The ceremonial driving of a golden spike completed the final link of the railroad on May 10, 1869, joining the U.S. Pacific and Atlantic coasts.

The golden spike ceremony for the Iraqi highway was performed by representatives of both Iraq and the coalition. Maj. Gen. Walter Natynczyk, deputy commander of the Multi-National Corps–Iraq, hammered the railroad spike into the center of the pavement with a representative of Iraq’s Ministry of Housing and Construction."

When Canadian opposition parties objected to a combat role in Iraq for Canadian soldiers, did he care? Not according to Scott Taylor, who interviewed him for Esprit de Corps and Macleans Magazine in March 2008.

"When III Corps began shipping out to Iraq in January, Natynczyk, 46, was part of the troop rotation. He is now based in one of Saddam Hussein's former presidential palaces in Baghdad, where he is the coalition's deputy chief of policy, strategy and planning, helping direct the movements of U.S., British and Australian troops."...

Question: When it was announced in November that you would be here, opposition parties in Ottawa objected, questioning how Canada could oppose the war yet deploy a senior officer. How do you feel about that?

Answer: I take orders from the Canadian government. The Canadian government sent me to Fort Hood, bottom line, to show in a tangible way the close affiliation between the U.S. and Canada. The Canadian government approved my deployment, so from my perspective there was no controversy. The instructions to me were clear: "move out" -- and as a soldier I complied....

Q: Personally, do you feel the intervention was justified?

A: That's way above my pay scale to speculate. But I am incredibly impressed by this country and its potential for the future. What I can say is that I believe we're making a contribution. There's a heck of a lot of people who will have a better life and a better future because of what we're doing here today.

Ah, yes, didn't that work out well.

But never mind. He's very popular with the American military, which is, of course, all that matters.

Natynczyk promotion to CDS popular with U.S. commanders

"...Four years ago this spring in Baghdad, Natynczyk was working in a room cluttered with computers and maps in one of Saddam Hussein's many palaces within the Green Zone, which is the huge cordon sanitaire that the U.S. military has carved out for itself near the heart of Baghdad. Other than a red Maple Leaf flag patch on his left shoulder and his Canadian army summer khaki, there were not many traces of Canada to be seen in his office."

...In his new job, Natynczyk also will be consulting with Gen. David Petraeus, who runs the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan as the commander of CENTCOM. Natynczyk and Petraeus, who is widely tipped as the next leader of all U.S. forces, also served together in Iraq."

That's telling...that there were "not many traces of Canada to be seen in his office." To tell you the truth, there are not many traces of Canada to be seen in the upper echelons of the Canadian military these days either.

And working with Petraeus? Someone once said that his main accomplishment was getting out just before the situation he'd presided over collapsed completely, like leaving town just ahead of the sheriff and his posse.

And this is what Admiral Fallon thought of Petraeus.

[CENTCOM Commander Admiral William] Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ass-kissing little chickens**t" and added, "I hate people like that,"

...[Fallon] demonstrated his independence from the White House when he refused in February to go along with a proposal to send a third naval carrier task force to the Persian Gulf, as reported by IPS in May. Fallon questioned the military necessity for the move, which would have signaled to Iran a readiness to go to war. Fallon also privately vowed that there would be no war against Iran on his watch, implying that he would quit rather than accept such a policy.

But Natynczyk did do a favour for Harper's government. He ran interference for Harper when the Afghan detainee abuse scandal was going through hearings. You scratch my back, eh?

But even when Jean Chretien was in office, he denied that any Canadians were in combat roles in Iraq.

"Prime Minister Chrétien says Canada isn't at war with Iraq. But he conceded that some Canadian soldiers could be with U.S. and British troops inside the country. "It's possible," he said, "but they are not in combat roles."

On January 24, 2006, Governor General Michaëlle Jean awarded him the Meritorious Service Cross.

She recognized Natynczyk "for his outstanding leadership and professionalism while deployed as Deputy Commanding General of the Multi-National Corps during Operation Iraqi Freedom

"From January 2004 to January 2005, Major General Natynczyk led the Corps' 10 separate brigades, consisting of more than 35,000 soldiers stationed throughout the Iraq Theater of Operations. He also oversaw planning and execution of all Corps level combat support and combat service support operations.

"His pivotal role in the development of numerous plans and operations resulted in a tremendous contribution by the Multi-National Corps to Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, and has brought great credit to the Canadian Forces and to Canada."

The Governor General, of course, has no role in deciding who gets medals for what. They come from the Prime Minister's office, in this case, the war-loving Stephen Harper. So first you decorate the general, and then you propose him for CDS and say "Look! He's a decorated general."

He did leak the story, though, that Harper's visions of military glory were going to cost Canada a lot more than he'd first said. Maybe Canada had other plans for its money. Never mind. He won't open his mouth again. Harper sat on him but good, and when Harper sits on someone, they stay sat upon.

"Lieutenant-General Walter Natynczyk, vice-chief of the Defence Staff, said the military would spend between $45-billion and $50-billion on planes, combat vehicles, ships and fighters under the Canada First Defence Strategy, the Conservative government's plan for the military that was originally released Monday without comprehensive details."

It seems that Harper and Natynczyk are really close buds, though, since they traveled to Afghanistan together. Nothing like warfare and bloodshed to really bond people.

In 2006, Natynczyk traveled with Prime Minister Stephen Harper to Afghanistan and CTV said they developed a close bond.

"...Natynczyk told reporters the Iraq posting taught him "techniques and procedures are exactly the same and the risks are identical" to those Canadian troops in the NATO mission face in Afghanistan."

Excuse me, but if the techniques and procedures are exactly the same in Iraq and Afghanistan, aren't we going to get exactly the same result - military hegemony, debt or bankruptcy to fund the never ending war, more death of Canadian soldiers and Afghan civilians, and a permanent garrisoning of Afghanistan?

The hypocrisy of it all.

Canada is a member of "...CW-HUSH - Coalition of the Willing to Help but Unwilling to be Seen Helping."

Canada’s secret war in Iraq by Richard Sanders.
by Richard Sanders

But after all, this is what it's really all about.

National Legion of Merit to Natynczyk from the DefendAmerica website

For an overview of what NATO is really all about, here's Bill Blum's latest newsletter.

And a bit of light relief.
Canadian Tire flyer today "2-week gigantic tool sale."

Unfortunately, Harper and his government weren't on the block.

Canada's muddled mission

Canada's Muddled Afghan Mission

by Neil Kitson

"...Afghanistan has cost about 80 Canadian lives and a lot of money. There's no end in sight, the Liberals have no discernible position, and the Conservative government says we're there so that little girls can go to school without fear. The truth: the world forgot about Afghanistan after 1989 (apart from the admirable Ottawa Convention), the country is still impoverished, Canadian involvement there is made up on the back of an envelope Rick Hillier got from the Pentagon, and nobody has a clue how to end this disaster."

"...We have recently had a "debate" in the House of Commons about the Afghanistan "mission," a debate conspicuously lacking all the right questions, namely: What are we doing there? What is the goal? Why is it worth Canadian soldiers' lives when other NATO countries don't believe the whole enterprise is worth dying for, whatever that enterprise is? The "debate" is in fact about when "it" will end, whatever "it" is. The Liberals started "it," Harper's pushing "it," Hillier's ready to die for "it," but nobody knows what "it" is."

This is an expert that Harper should listen to.

Afghan citizen and expelled MP Malalai Joya had this to say on rabble.ca.

She is a real expert on Afghanistan, not the people on the cobbled together "bipartisan" panel that issued the Manley report. Funny - Manley ran screaming from a suggestion that he would be nominated as the super-envoy for Afghanistan. Wonder why? Too dangerous for you, John? It's OK for young soldiers, though. Leading from behind, just like Harper.

But would Harper listen to an actual Afghan citizen and elected member of the Afghan parliament? I doubt it. And there's the fact that she's a woman. We all know what Stevie thinks of women.

"The great people of Canada should know that today our people in Afghanistan are not looking at their soldiers as any different from U.S. or other NATO troops. For our people, all of them are the same because, unfortunately, for seven years they have followed the footpath of the U.S. You cannot bring values like democracy and human rights by supporting the sworn enemies of these values."

"...There is no question that Afghanistan needs a helping hand. But our people are now saying, if you do not support or help us, it would be better that you leave Afghanistan so that people here can fight against their enemies who are in power themselves."

"But we don't only want the withdrawal of these foreign troops. We also want the withdrawal of the warlords and the Taliban. We want disarmament of these criminals and we want support for democratic parties."

A constitution not worth dying for

This is what Canada and NATO soldiers are fighting and dying for.

We know, of course, that big business is really after the oil and mineral rights, and they're using the military system to clear the way.

This doesn't sound like an idea of a system I'd want anything to do with.

"Nowhere is the Afghan conundrum more clearly illustrated than in the case of Sayed Parwez Kambakhsh, the 23-year-old journalism student in northern Afghanistan who has been condemned to death for blasphemy.

“...Justice will be done,” President Hamed Karzai assured the Secretary of State when she brought up the matter at their meeting in Kabul on February 7.

...This was interpreted as a tacit promise to ensure Parwez’s freedom. But for those who have spent a significant amount of time in Afghanistan, the wording was ominous.

...Based on past performance, we have little guarantee that the Afghan concept of justice will be something we can easily recognize or live with.

...What is at stake here is more than the fate of one young man. The world should not ignore the fact that Parwez’s arrest and imprisonment were not an aberration.

...The case, instead, is a symbol of the central contradiction at the heart of the Afghan judicial system, and a worrying sign of the direction in which the country is heading.

...Six years later, it is obvious that we have made a serious miscalculation. The constitution that was to be a milestone on the straight road to democracy contains within it a time bomb that could make cases like that of Parwez Kambakhsh increasingly common.

...Article Three of the Afghan Constitution reads “In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.”

...This one sentence negates all of the ensuing high-sounding rhetoric that guarantees freedom of religion, expression and the media. If the Ulema, or Council of Religious Scholars, is allowed to interpret Islam as it wishes, then almost any act, utterance or publication can be deemed a criminal offence.

Training Afghan police

Maybe the Afghan police should be trained not to do this.

Three Afghan National Police officers were sent to prison Saturday after being found guilty of gang raping a 12-year-old boy and his father.

Or maybe Canada should just get the hell out of there.

And it's 1,2,3...what are we fighting for? (part six)

Out of the mouths of babes - or the Afghan Minister of Mines and Resources (and he's no babe, believe me).

I guess this is really why the Harperites and the Hilliers of this world are trying to extend the "mission" in Afghanistan - greed, greed, greed.

Afghanistan sitting on a gold mine

"Significant deposits of copper, iron, gold, oil and gas, and coal - as well as precious gems such as emeralds and rubies - are largely untapped and still being mapped, Mohammad Ibrahim Adel told AFP.

"...And they promise prosperity for one of the world's poorest countries, the minister said, dismissing concerns that a Taliban-led insurgency may thwart efforts to unearth this treasure.

"...In five years' time Afghanistan will not need the world's aid money," he said. "In 10 years Afghanistan will be the richest country in the region."

Can we have our soldiers and our money back - now?

Scientifically ignorant leadership

Thanks, Stevie. You're doing a hell of a job.

A CBC report on an article from the journal "Nature" about Canada's ignorant leadership.

"Science has long faced an uphill battle for recognition in Canada, but the slope became steeper when the Conservative government was elected in 2006," the journal said in an editorial titled "Science in Retreat."

"...The journal notes last month's government order for Environment Canada scientists to route all media enquiries through Ottawa for an "approved" response and the cabinet's failure to attend a reception for Nobel Prize winning Canadian scientists last week in Ottawa.

"...The journal says leading Canadian scientists must be better public advocates for scientific funding and support, adding the possibility of an upcoming federal election could "lead to a change for the better".

Calling all Pied Pipers

Juan Cole had this to say about McCain and his hundred years or more war in Iraq on Informed Comment today:

McCain is the Pied Piper of Hamelin; he'll be glad to get rid of your rat problem, but at the price of making your children disappear.

McCain could be replaced by Manley and his illustrious panel, Harper, McKay, Hillier or anybody else who thinks that extending the Afghanistan "mission" will do anything but increase the bloodshed and destruction.

Captions, please.

From the Toronto Star today, this picture accompanying Thomas Walkom's article on the future of the Canadian military in Afghanistan.

It shows Stephen Harper with a couple of mascots at the Quebec "Carnaval".


A couple of captions come to mind:

"Who's the fat white guy with his thumb up and the weird grin on his face?"

"That's Stephen Harper. The other one is Bonhomme Carnaval."

Or the alternative answer:

"That's Harry the Horse's other half."

Military Keynesianism sinking Canada

"Five million behind me and ten million more to go..." (with apologies to James Taylor).

"Canadian troops fired more than 4.7 million bullets at insurgents over the last 20 months in Afghanistan, according to new statistics released by the military."

"...[B]ut a top general warns Taliban insurgents based in the mountains around Kandahar are reading articles in the Ottawa newspaper on a regular basis and that the military has to be careful about what details it releases.

Apart from Taliban militias sitting up in the mountains reading Ottawa newspapers as a concept I simply can't wrap my head around, I suggest that Canadian soldiers and their overlords should spend a little time doing the same for Afghan newspapers and websites. No Pashto required - loads are written in English.

Makes a "good" case for muzzling the Canadian press - not only are the Taliban in the dark, but so are Canadians. Hmmm...nice twisted logic here.

"...[A]ccording to an e-mail from the Defence Department, for the period between April 2006 and December 2007, troops fired more than 2.9 million rounds of 5.56-mm ammunition, the standard bullet used in Canadian rifles.

Troops fired more than 1.6 million rounds of 7.62-mm machine-gun bullets and more than 115,000 rounds of .50-calibre machine-gun ammunition during the same time frame.

Canadian tanks fired 1,650 shells and the army's artillery guns used up more than 12,000 rounds during fighting."

A little military Keynesianism anyone? Chalmers Johnson on militarism as the basis for an economy, in this case, the U.S.

"... by military Keynesianism, I mean the mistaken belief that public policies focused on frequent wars, huge expenditures on weapons and munitions, and large standing armies can indefinitely sustain a wealthy capitalist economy. The opposite is actually true.

...[T]his sum of staggering size (try to visualize a billion of something) does not express the cost of the military establishment to the nation as a whole. The true cost is measured by what has been foregone, by the accumulated deterioration in many facets of life by the inability to alleviate human wretchedness of long duration."

That's the thing to think about - what has been foregone, the accumulated deterioration in many facets of life.

Let's not help spread this empire

Why is Canada supporting the U.S. in any of its foreign policy goals? Is this what you want to see all over the world?

And this is why there should never be any question of handing Afghan prisoners to either Afghan authorities or the U.S. when they operate like this.

The administration and those now running for the next U.S. emperor's job are resolutely and militantly Christian. If they are, then they must believe that their god is a just god. They should be trembling in their $1000 shoes.

As for me, I think there is no god and the events of the universe are basically meaningless. That's the only explanation for the likes of the Bush cartel and their huge military gaining precedence in the world. That's the only explanation for Harper and his gang of liars, crooks and incompetents holding power in Canada.

It's a human's job to try to put some order and infuse some meaning into what is basically chaos.

So, let's kick Harper and his band of jeering sycophants out on their incompetent asses. The U.S. should do as it wishes, of course, but I'm sick to death of hearing all their emperors-in-waiting going on about their plans to "change the world". Mind your own bloody business, guys, clean up your own mess, and then open your eyes and take a look at what you've done.

Robert Fisk: Torture does not work, as history shows

The Americans are just apeing their predecessors in the Inquisition

"Torture works," an American special forces major – now, needless to say, a colonel – boasted to a colleague of mine a couple of years ago. It seems that the CIA and its hired thugs in Afghanistan and Iraq still believe this.

There's much more to read, in Robert's Fisk's clear, compassionate, and truthful report. All the things Bush and Harper and their lackeys aren't.

They just can't shut up, can they?

Longer troop deployments urged

Last month, U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates frayed tender NATO nerves by suggesting some allied troops in southern Afghanistan come up short in the battle against insurgents.

Now the senior U.S. commander on the ground in Afghanistan has elaborated on the theme, saying that six-month deployments such as those undertaken by Canadian soldiers lack the longevity to get the job done American-style.

Are they kidding here? Getting the job done American-style. Uh-huh. They're doing a bang-up job in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just look at the peace and prosperity enjoyed in the areas where the U.S. has full sway.

I don't suppose they even see the irony in this next bit.

Praising the "absolutely amazing" progress in U.S.-controlled sectors of eastern Afghanistan against the struggles encountered by Dutch, British and Canadian troops in the south, McNeill contrasted the elongated 15-month rotations of American troops against the six-month rotations that are the norm for Canadian soldiers.

American soldiers are coming back from the optional wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan with horrific injuries, PTSD, depression and who knows what else. Homelessness among returned veterans is approaching Vietnam era standards. They are killing others and themselves at a record rate when they do return. Maybe other countries don't want to destroy their citizens and civil society in this way, to help the U.S. spread all over the world like an oil slick.

"They probably are not as well-endowed by their governments as U.S. soldiers are. Some of them don't have the same level of pre-deployment training."

The families of U.S. soldiers are sending them body-armour because the stuff they get from their government is sub-standard. They send them cans of silly string to help find trip wires for roadside bombs. I guess the Pentagon doesn't have the silly string manufacturers on their payroll. They have also had to take ever-lower level recruits and cut short their training to keep the troop numbers up. This crap is unbelieveable.

"But he also suggested that NATO should consider the idea of U.S. forces taking charge of the southern command, where the Taliban insurgency is strongest."

So they could drop bombs on them from a great height, the U.S. strategy of choice. Civilians, women, children blown to atoms? No problem. We got them Taliban but good, yee-haw! What they don't get is that the Taliban are civilans who want the western types the hell out of their country.

Not born yesterday

And if you believe this, I have some beautiful waterfront property in Florida that I'd like to sell you.

Won't torture prisoners, Afghans promise Canada

Canada was assured by a senior member of Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government on Friday that the handover of Taliban prisoners in Kandahar can resume without the fear of torture.

The pledge came from Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak, who was attending a two-day informal meeting of NATO defence chiefs.

"All the necessary actions which were required have been taken by the Afghan government," he told reporters as the meeting broke up.

"So I think they can resume without being worried."

NATO is a treaty on wheels...

From Bill Blum, fighting against useless wars of aggression since the 1960's.

Let's hope Canada gets out before it's crushed by the wheels. Rick Hillier can go on fighting in Afghanistan if he wants to, but not on my dime.

NATO is a treaty on wheels -- It can be rolled in any direction to suit Washington's current policy

Have you by chance noticed that NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, has become virtually a country? With more international rights and military power than almost any other country in the world? Yes, the same NATO that we were told was created in 1949 to defend against a Soviet attack in Western Europe, and thus should have gone out of existence in 1991 when the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact expired and explicitly invited NATO to do the same. Other reasons have been suggested for NATO's creation: to help suppress the left in Italy and France if either country's Communist Party came to power through an election, and/or to advance American hegemony by preventing the major European nations from pursuing independent foreign policies. This latter notion has been around a long time. In 2004, the US ambassador to NATO, Nicholas Burns, stated: "Europeans need to resist creating a united Europe in competition or as a counterweight to the United States."

... It is presently waging war in Afghanistan on behalf of the United States and its illegal 2001 bombing and invasion of that pathetic land. NATO's forces free up US troops and assume much of the responsibility and blame, instead of Washington, for the many bombings which have caused serious civilian casualties and ruination. NATO also conducts raids into Pakistan, the legality of which is as non-existent as what they do in Afghanistan.

... The paper also declares that "Nato's credibility is at stake in Afghanistan" and "Nato is at a juncture and runs the risk of failure." The German general went so far as to declare that his own country, by insisting upon a non-combat role for its forces in Afghanistan, was contributing to "the dissolution of Nato". Such immoderate language may be a reflection of the dark cloud which has hovered over the alliance since the end of the Cold War -- that NATO has no legitimate reason for existence and that failure in Afghanistan would make this thought more present in the world's mind. If NATO hadn't begun to intervene outside of Europe it would have highlighted its uselessness and lack of mission. "Out of area or out of business" it was said."

What are these people smoking?

I think these people must be sampling some of Afghanistan's most profitable output.

Taliban contained, NATO says

NATO says the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan is not spreading and that 70 per cent of the violence last year occurred in only 10 per cent of the country.

NATO spokeswoman Lt. Col. Claudia Foss told a press conference in Kabul today "It is becoming increasingly clear that the insurgent movement is being contained."

Her comments follow some more pessimistic assessments of the situation in Afghanistan.

An independent study warned last week that Afghanistan risks becoming a failed state because of deteriorating international support and the growing Taliban insurgency.

Afghan journalist update

More about the young Afghan journalism student who has been sentenced to death for "insulting Islam" :

In Afghanistan, meanwhile, analysts and media rights advocates say the harsh sentence was delivered at the behest of powerful local figures, as an indirect form of retribution against Kaambakhsh’s brother, Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, a reporter who has written extensively on human rights abuses in the north.

Sentence was passed at a summary hearing held by the lower court for Balkh region on January 22, at which Kaambakhsh was offered no chance to speak, and had no legal representation.

And it's 1, 2, 3...what are we fighting for? (part cinq)

Now...this government and it's principles sound like something worth fighting and dying for.

"Afghanistan's Senate has issued a statement lauding the death sentence against a local journalist found guilty of insulting Islam.

The statement, signed by Senate Chairman Sibghatullah Mojaddedi, also condemns attempts by outsiders to have the sentence annulled, calling it "international interference."

...He was charged after printing an article he found on the Internet and distributing it to journalism students at Balkh University.

The article asked why men can have four wives but women can't have multiple husbands."

Meanwhile, NATO wants Canada to continue sending troops to kill and die in Kandahar. Well, of course it would.

"NATO thinks Canada is doing a very important and valuable job in Kandahar," Appathurai told reporters. "We hope Canada will find a way to extend the mission."

Canadians do not wish to extend the mission, of course, but Stephen Harper is not in the position of minority prime minister to carry out the wishes of Canadian citizens but to carry out his own wishes using other peoples lives and money. He seems to forget that he is our representative, not our king. And he represents only a third of us, maybe less.

But considering what NATO's plan for the world is, it's not surprising Harper is on board. A recent "manifesto" from some of NATO's best warmongers sounds like Orwell meets Dr. Strangelove.

Calling for root-and-branch reform of Nato and a new pact drawing the US, Nato and the European Union together in a "grand strategy" to tackle the challenges of an increasingly brutal world, the former armed forces chiefs from the US, Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands insist that a "first strike" nuclear option remains an "indispensable instrument" since there is "simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world".

To prevail, the generals call for an overhaul of Nato decision-taking methods, a new "directorate" of US, European and Nato leaders to respond rapidly to crises, and an end to EU "obstruction" of and rivalry with Nato. Among the most radical changes demanded are:

· A shift from consensus decision-taking in Nato bodies to majority voting, meaning faster action through an end to national vetoes.

· The abolition of national caveats in Nato operations of the kind that plague the Afghan campaign.

· No role in decision-taking on Nato operations for alliance members who are not taking part in the operations.

· The use of force without UN security council authorisation when "immediate action is needed to protect large numbers of human beings".

So, as far as I can tell, it calls for pre-emptive nuclear war against whomever a "majority" of NATO participants decide is worth vapourising to protect its "civilization". No one is allowed to disagree or abstain from such slaughter. The opinion of the citizens of such countries simply don't count. If you don't fight and bomb, you have no say in what happens. And forget about UN authorization. NATO knows what's best and what's worthy of blasting from the face of the earth.

Sounds like Iraq all over again.

Include me out.

Training with Americans - that should work.

Fighting American wars - one Canadian soldier at a time.

That's right - let's pay our soldiers to go and fight for the Americans. Now that's what Canadians stand for - U.S. military imperialism all over the globe. Canada - home of the mercenary. I'm so proud.

"Despite the government's official position abstaining from combat in Iraq, Canada has dispatched yet another top general to the command group overseeing day-to-day operations for the US-led occupation and counterinsurgency war...Matern is the third Canadian general to serve in the command group of Operation Iraqi Freedom as part of an exchange program that places Canadian Forces officers in leadership positions in the US military. His deployment is part of a three-year post with the US Army's 18th Airborne Corps, based out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina."

So we're going to send our soldiers to train in Texas to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. With the Americans' outstanding success in Afghanistan and Iraq so far, that sounds like a wonderful plan. What the hell is going on here?

Meanwhile, 42 Canadian tanks and armored personnel carriers left Edmonton last week destined for Fort Bliss, Texas to participate in pre-deployment training exercises with the US Army before a summer rotation in Afghanistan. A Department of National Defense press release characterized the training as "massive," with more than 3,000 Canadian soldiers taking part in Exercise Southern Bear.

How much Canadian oil is being shipped south to the U.S.? If we weren't destroying our air and water to ship it south, we wouldn't have to import from Iraq, would we? But then, the U.S. owns Stephen Harper and would rather import from Canada - the willing doormats of the Americans - than the risky Iraq.

There are also economic interests in Iraq itself. The April 2007 Iraq Reconstruction Report lists Canada as the fourth largest importer of Iraqi oil. Industry Canada records that total Canadian imports from Iraq have risen from 1.06 billion dollars in 2002 to 1.61 billion dollars in 2006, making Iraq second only to Saudi Arabia as a Middle Eastern source for Canadian imports.

Warrior ethos - what the crap is this guy talking about?

Col. Bill Buckner of the 18th Airborne told the Ottawa Citizen. "We're the home of the airborne and the special operating forces, so he fits in very nicely to this warrior ethos we have here."

But at least we know why Stephen Harper bought those "slush breakers", the new frigates that were supposed to protect our northern border. We'd always be ready to protect American interests in the Persian Gulf.

As well, Canadian frigates continue to operate alongside the US aircraft carriers in the Arabian Gulf that are a primary staging platform for bombing raids in Iraq.

So not only are we taking part in a disastrous war in Afghanistan, we're also taking part in an illegal war in Iraq.

Though approximately 93 percent of the coalition troops in Iraq are American, the US has long been keen to emphasize the multinational component of a war that former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan described as "illegal."

I believe it's called putting lipstick on a pig, General Devlin.

Major General Peter Devlin, a Canadian Forces officer currently operating as deputy commanding general in Iraq, recently told the Washington Post that the effect of the multinational element is in bringing "greater legitimacy to the effort here in Iraq."

Peace and Martin Luther King

As Canada's New Government and Mr. Harper await the results of the Manley Report which will recommend that Canada stay in Afghanistan for another three years - after all, his hand-picked panel could hardly come out with any other result - I think about some words from Martin Luther King Jr. on his day.

From Juan Cole's "Informed Comment":

They are talking about peace as a distant goal, as an end we seek, but one day we must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal.

We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means.

All of this is saying that, in the final analysis, means and ends must cohere because the end is preexistent in the means, and ultimately destructive means cannot bring about constructive ends.

...' More recently I have come to see the need for the method of nonviolence in international relations.

Although I was not yet convinced of its efficacy in conflicts between nations, I felt that while war could never be a positive good, it could serve as a negative good by preventing the spread and growth of an evil force. War, horrible as it is, might be preferable to surrender to a totalitarian system.

But now I believe that the potential destructiveness of modern weapons totally rules out the possibility of war ever again achieving a negative good.

If we assume that mankind has a right to survive then we must find an alternative to war and destruction.

Robert Gates, ¿por qué no te callas?

Can nobody in the U.S. administration say anything without inserting both feet in their mouths up to their considerable asses?

"In comments reported Wednesday by the Los Angeles Times, Gates said that while U.S. forces in eastern Afghanistan are doing a terrific job, he is concerned that NATO allies are not well trained in counterinsurgency operations."

Now, he says NATO troops are doing a wonderful job.

Wow! Gee, Mr. Gates! Thanks!

"Gates made the remark a day after Pentagon officials acknowledged he has concerns about the allies' ability to battle an insurgency in Afghanistan."

..."Our NATO allies are playing a significant role, particularly Canada and the United Kingdom and the Dutch. This kind of role, even with the addition of our marines, will remain essentially the same."

Oh, you mean getting killed at a rate higher than any other forces there, and then getting slagged off by the U.S. Defence Secretary?

If you don't mind, I think we'll pass on that one.

These asinine remarks came close to the sixth anniversary (April 18, 2002) of the date when U.S. pilots dumped bombs on Canadian troops on night exercises on the ground in Afghanistan and killed four of them and wounded a further eight. Nice work! Canada's first casualties in the war, and the U.S. did it.

Then they killed another one in September, 2006. Dropped a bomb on him too.

And they've been finishing off the British troops, too.

As far as I know, the Dutch have escaped the U.S. bombs - so far, anyway.

As far as Canadian expertise goes, they had this to say:

"I think our allies over there, this is not something they have any experience with," he told the Times.

First of all, Mr. Gates, I think the number of your allies is diminishing by the minute.

Your NATO "allies" might do a bit better if you'd stop blowing them up.

And as far as our success with counterinsurgency: "Pentagon officials acknowledged he [Gates] has concerns about the allies' ability to battle an insurgency in Afghanistan."

By the way, how's it going in Iraq, eh?

The 'Good War' Is a Bad War

From John Pilger, on the selling of the war in Afghanistan as the "good war".

The women of RAWA know what's going on and have been trying to tell the world since 1977.

"...Rawa is the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, which since 1977 has alerted the world to the suffering of women and girls in that country. There is no organization on earth like it. It is the high bar of feminism, home of the bravest of the brave."

"...Rawa's understanding of the designs and hypocrisy of western governments informs a truth about Afghanistan excluded from news..."

"We, the women of Afghanistan, only became a cause in the west following 11 September 2001, when the Taliban suddenly became the official enemy of America. Yes, they persecuted women, but they were not unique, and we have resented the silence in the west over the atrocious nature of the western-backed warlords, who are no different. They rape and kidnap and terrorize, yet they hold seats in [Hamid] Karzai's government. In some ways, we were more secure under the Taliban. You could cross Afghanistan by road and feel secure. Now, you take your life into your hands."

So, are we helping RAWA? No, Canada is officially supporting the government of Karzai. Ninety-five percent of the money being spent during this stupid war is going on military expenditure, five percent on aid.

And are we fighting terrorism? Nooooo...we're supporting another one of the U.S.'s pre-planned wars of imperialism.

"...The truth about the "good war" is to be found in compelling evidence that the 2001 invasion, widely supported in the west as a justifiable response to the 11 September attacks, was actually planned two months prior to 9/11..."

"...Acclaimed as the first "victory" in the "war on terror," the attack on Afghanistan in October 2001 and its ripple effect caused the deaths of thousands of civilians who, even more than Iraqis, remain invisible to western eyes. The family of Gulam Rasul is typical. It was 7.45am on 21 October. The headmaster of a school in the town of Khair Khana, Rasul had just finished eating breakfast with his family and had walked outside to chat to a neighbor. Inside the house were his wife, Shiekra, his four sons, aged three to ten, his brother and his wife, his sister and her husband. He looked up to see an aircraft weaving in the sky, then his house exploded in a fireball behind him. Nine people died in this attack by a US F-16 dropping a 500lb bomb. The only survivor was his nine-year-old son, Ahmad Bilal. "Most of the people killed in this war are not Taliban; they are innocents," Gulam Rasul told me. "Was the killing of my family a mistake? No, it was not. They fly their planes and look down on us, the mere Afghan people, who have no planes, and they bomb us for our birthright, and with all contempt."

Day after day, Canadian papers report that even more Taliban have been killed. Sometimes they put in the proviso that they may be "suspected" Taliban. Not one has the courage to write, "We don't know who the hell we're killing, but the Taliban must be recruiting awfully young these days. Those three-year-olds can be dangerous."

"...these days the dead are described as "Taliban"; or, if they are children, they are said to be "partly to blame for being at a site used by militants" – according to the BBC, speaking to a US military spokesman."

So, why are we fighting, killing and dying?

"...Various fables have been spun – "building democracy" is one. "The war on drugs" is the most perverse. When the Americans invaded Afghanistan in 2001 they had one striking success. They brought to an abrupt end a historic ban on opium production that the Taliban regime had achieved. A UN official in Kabul described the ban to me as "a modern miracle." The miracle was quickly rescinded. As a reward for supporting the Karzai "democracy," the Americans allowed Northern Alliance warlords to replant the country's entire opium crop in 2002. Twenty-eight out of the 32 provinces instantly went under cultivation."

Right. Making the world safe for warlords, opium and the American hegemony.

Oh, what a funny war! (part two)

Chalmers Johnson isn't very amused by funny wars either.

The historian who brought us Blowback, Nemesis, and other tales of American imperialism, Johnson gives us the history behind the war in Afghanistan, the "freedom fighters" armed and trained by the U.S. to fight the Soviet Union, then dumped when no longer useful, who turn on the U.S. and anybody daft enough to side with them.

See the funny side of it yet? Neither do I, and neither did he.

This line will stay with me for a long, long time.

"What to make of the film (which I found rather boring and old-fashioned)? It makes the U.S. government look like it is populated by a bunch of whoring, drunken sleazebags, so in that sense it's accurate enough."

Our mission in Afghanistan?

"...One of the severe side effects of imperialism in its advanced stages seems to be that it rots the brains of the imperialists. They start believing that they are the bearers of civilization, the bringers of light to "primitives" and "savages" (largely so identified because of their resistance to being "liberated" by us), the carriers of science and modernity to backward peoples, beacons and guides for citizens of the "underdeveloped world."

And what is going to be the outcome? Maybe the original story can tell us.

"...we are told by another insider reviewer, James Rocchi, that the scenario, as originally written by Aaron Sorkin of "West Wing" fame, included the following line for Avrakotos: "Remember I said this: There's going to be a day when we're gonna look back and say 'I'd give anything if [Afghanistan] were overrun with Godless communists'." This line is nowhere to be found in the final film."

So where has all this fighting, dying, and endless military expenditure gotten us?

"...Today there is ample evidence that, when it comes to the freedom of women, education levels, governmental services, relations among different ethnic groups, and quality of life -- all were infinitely better under the Afghan communists than under the Taliban or the present government of President Hamid Karzai, which evidently controls little beyond the country's capital, Kabul."

But don't take my word for it. You can either listen to the historian or you can listen to Tom Hanks.

Oh, what a funny war!

From Counterpunch, a scathing review by Stanley Heller of "Charlie Wilson's War", or how to make war funny and appealing now that Iraq is yesterday's news.

"...Imagine, they made a funny movie about how the US helped turn Afghanistan into a killing field...To be sure it was the Soviets who did most of the killing...Yet the evidence is that the US government wanted the Soviets to invade and did what it could to provoke it."

But wait... it gets even funnier.

"Mike Nichols who directed the movie had very little to say about the fact that the weapons we [the U.S.] gave the mujahadeen ended up being used in a long and bloody Afghan civil war once the Soviets left and that the mujahadeen/warlords mutated into the Taliban and al-Qaeda."

And Canadians are killing and being killed to try to wipe out the U.S. creation.

"...This movie glorying in our "triumph" in Afghanistan fits well in Washington's current climate where Democrats fall all over themselves saying Iraq was a mistake, but we should be sending more money and troops to Afghanistan. Sure, we really need to sacrifice more American lives for a warlord "Northern Alliance" government that is so hated that the Taliban is making a comeback."

And this is the government that is telling Canada how important it is that we keep troops there forever to keep it in power.

I'd rather listen to RAWA (Revolutionary Association of Afghan Women).

"..Instead of defeating Al-Qaeda, Taliban and Gulbuddini terrorists and disarming the Northern Alliance, the foreign troops are creating confusion among the people of the world. We believe that if these troops leave Afghanistan, our people will not feel any kind of vacuum but rather will become more free and come out of their current puzzlement and doubts. In such a situation, they will face the Taliban and Northern Alliance without their national' mask, and rise to fight with these terrorist enemies. Neither the US nor any other power wants to release Afghan people from the fetters of the fundamentalists."

But is Stephen Harper listening? I doubt he's ever heard of RAWA. Besides, what would they know? It's their country, their history and their future. It is therefore best decided by puffy white conservative guys in Canada.

Not too surprising though. He doesn't care much for the welfare of Canadian women either.

And he wonders "whether Canada really gets Afghanistan".

"...Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he is uncertain whether Canadians at large understand the importance of remaining involved in Afghanistan..After demoting Gordon O'Connor from defence to the revenue portfolio as part of a broader cabinet shakeup, Mr. Harper seemed to get a firmer grip on the direction of the war, enough for the Conservatives to boldly suggest in their fall Throne Speech that Canada should remain deeply involved in Afghanistan until 2011...In June, a Canadian Press-Decima Research survey found 67 per cent of those asked believed the number of casualties in Afghanistan is unacceptable when weighed against the progress that made in reconstruction and keeping the Taliban at bay in Kandahar..."

Oh, we get it, Stevie. You'll do what you want, "punch above your weight", ignore the wishes of most Canadians and more people will die.

Couldn't have said it better myself...

From the Harper Index

I think the Harper government is one of the most loathsome, mean-spirited, self-serving gang of rogues I've ever witnessed.

...Harper's a different breed. He's a nasty fellow who stealthily dismantles small programs over time, thereby eroding and ultimately washing away some of our cherished programs.

Now I'm SURE we're doing something wrong

Praise from the Liar-in-Chief and his cohorts doesn't warm the cockles of my heart, I'm afraid.

"President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised Canada and other allies Thursday for their combat roles in Afghanistan while saying the U.S. administration is worried NATO countries will eventually tire of the mission and leave."

I'm afraid I'm still not too sure I know what this mission is. What are we doing there, again?

"...Canada also wanted to know whether more U.S. troops would be available for Afghanistan as they leave Iraq. The response was that it won't happen in the short term; a point U.S. Defence Minister Robert Gates has been making."

Sorry, but you're on your own. Afghanistan is important for the U.S., but just not important enough to send soldiers. NATO countries can die for the U.S. war, and should be PROUD to do so.

"...Earlier in the day, Bush mentioned the Canadians - along with the British, Dutch, Danes and Australians - at a news conference, thanking them for their "contribution of shooters, fighters, people that are willing to be on the front line."

Hey, what happened to humanitarian intervention, schools, women's rights, all that stuff? (Don't worry - I never believed that snowjob anyway.)

"It's a dangerous mission but it's a mission that we're proud of," said Bernier, noting the Conservative government is hoping to stay longer.

Most Canadians aren't proud. They're angry, confused and sad. And the Egyptians already told us what the Conservative government has in mind. Anybody who doesn't have their head buried in the sand or up their own fundament knows that this is Stevie's War, and he won't let anyone leave while there's still a man standing.

"...Rice called Canada "an extraordinary partner" making an "invaluable and effective" contribution to what is an "absolutely essential mission ... crucial to the future of the United States, Canada and all civilized nations."

The only one Rice is worried about is the U.S., and she's done such a wonderful job so far, Americans are terrified. When did Canada become a U.S. colony? Praise from Condoleezza Rice makes me acutely uncomfortable.

"... It was the United States that was attacked on Sept. 11th..."

She's starting to sound like Giuliani - the Sept. 11th mantra, over and over and over...

And - oh, yeah - Afghanistan did not attack the U.S.

"...Canada also raised concerns about U.S. rules that prohibit military manufacturers from employing dual nationals and foreign-born citizens on American projects in Canada."

This could be a good thing. Why should we be manufacturing the materials of slaughter?

Does Harper read Egyptian newspapers?

Has Stephen Harper accepted what the Egyptians already know? (Bold typeface is mine.)

"Thirty-eight countries have supplied troops to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force but most of them, including those from Germany and France, are precluded by their governments from combat operations. Different national contingents have different rules of engagement.

Troops from the United States, Britain, the Netherlands, Canada, and Australia have been engaged with the Taliban in the southern provinces. However, public support for the troop presence is not strong in those countries apart from the United States. The Netherlands just committed to keep its troops in Afghanistan till 2010 only after a contentious public and parliamentary debate that threatened to break up the governing coalition.

But here's something interesting. We're committed until 2010? When did Harper go to parliament to debate this, as he promised to? (Ha! Promises! I'm not deluded enough to believe any promises that come from the secretive New Canadian Government.)

...Dutch troops will definitely pull out in 2010, and the Canadians and Australians may well follow suit.

It's wonderful to have to read an Egyptian editorial to find out what's happening.

Child soldiers in Afghanistan

Another reason for not handing over people captured in the field to Afghan authorities. Children are being recruited by government forces, Afghan police and militias who support them, and private security companies. They are sexually abused, used for hard labour, or sent to fight.

The Taliban use children to fight or carry out suicide missions.

AFGHANISTAN: Child soldiers operating on several fronts

KANDAHAR, 19 December 2007 (IRIN) - Children are being recruited and in some cases sexually abused by the Afghan police and/or various militias that support the police, as well as by private security companies and the Taliban, according to human rights and provincial officials.

...Some children are recruited for military and non-military purposes by local militias who are paid by the government to supplement the fledgling ANP in volatile southern provinces. However, due to lack of proper monitoring and accountability mechanisms, and the informal nature of the auxiliary forces, the use and abuse of child soldiers remains undocumented.

"Children are used for different purposes," Noorzai said. "The majority of them experience sexual abuse, others do all kinds of jobs such as cooking, cleaning, day patrols and even fighting," he said.

...Under-age males have also been seen working for private security companies, particularly in Kandahar and Helmand provinces, said a senior government official who insisted on anonymity.

...Afghan officials also accuse the Taliban and other anti-government elements of deliberately using children for various military and illegitimate purposes. The Taliban use boys as foot soldiers and force children to engage in violent acts, they say.

Torture? Mais non, we know nothing about it (part deux).

Sounds like a plan to me, but I don't think they meant it that way.

A top military commander says in a sworn affidavit Canadian troops would have to quit fighting the Taliban if they could not hand prisoners over to Afghan authorities.

Maybe they shouldn't have been so gung-ho to charge in there, then.

..Although Canada is waging its biggest war effort in more than half a century, the 2,500-soldier commitment to Afghanistan has only a limited capacity to hold prisoners temporarily. That is by design. "The Canadian Forces has no capacity or ability to hold detainees other than for transfer purposes," says Gen. Deschamps, an air force general who once commanded the Camp Mirage logistics base in the Gulf.

Doing the right thing, only after they've been found out, as usual.

..Despite intensive follow-up inspections, arranged by the Harper government only after The Globe and Mail published harrowing detainee accounts of torture and abuse in Afghan prisons, a significant number of transferred prisoners still say that they have been tortured after transfer.

This whole thing makes me sick.

And it's 1,2,3...what are we fighting for? (part quatre)

Khalilzad, Karzai and the "government" of Afghanistan - is this what young Canadians are dying for?

Khalilzad and the Gangs of Afghanistan

by Bahlol Lohdi

In an article last year, The Economist wondered how an inept individual like Hamid Karzai had managed to obtain the post of president of Afghanistan. The answer is found in the development of the relationship between Zalmay Khalilzad and Hamid Karzai.

...The period between the signing of the Bonn Accord and the installation of a transitional government in Kabul should have been used to effect a similar process, distancing the Afghan mujahedeen warlords and their criminal gangs from the levers of power.

...Unfortunately, the various loya jirgas, or "grand assemblies," attended and choreographed by Khalilzad as George Bush's special representative, instead of bringing forth the required apolitical, technocratic regime in order to begin the country's physical and social reconstruction, only served to entrench the status quo set in Bonn.

...The Afghan government is now widely described as being made up of various competing mafia groups.

...The relationship between Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Kabul, and Karzai, the Afghan president, was described in graphic and cringe-making detail in a New Yorker piece. And though it accurately portrayed the Afghan "leader" as a servile and ridiculous moron whose every action was being choreographed by the American plenipotentiary, it was a gratuitous insult to Afghan national pride.

Too bad Canada didn't have the "understandable reluctance" to pour lives and money into propping up this corrupt regime.

...But with the British military failure in Helmand, and an understandable reluctance by many NATO allies to expend blood and treasure to ensure the survival of a kleptocratic regime, Karzai's mantle of power began to look increasingly threadbare.

So, our soldiers are still fighting "Taliban", killing "Taliban", and getting killed, while our glorious leaders have known for a long time that it was a waste of time.

...a giant step forward was taken when it was admitted that there is no military solution to the Afghan problem. The British trumpeting of their preparations to "destroy the Taliban," thus "securing the back end of the country" and reordering things in Kabul so that it would "cut the mustard," and their subsequent rude awakening from such neo-imperial dreams, at least served this useful purpose.

Now, could we stop with the "punching above our weight" crapola from the Harper crowd?

.

..A final assumption that must be discarded, before moving on to consider the factors essential for a viable political solution, is the shibboleth that conflates NATO's future survival with that of its success or failure in Afghanistan. From the shrill and persistent vocalization of this meme, one would think that the NATO acronym stands for North Afghanistan Treaty Organization!

I wondered about that, too. Karzai and his pontificating about how thankful he was that Canadians were dying to keep him and the rest in power. I couldn't believe my ears.

Time to go, as quickly as possible.

...Unfortunately, the presence of Western forces on Afghan soil has become part of the Afghan problem and therefore can no longer be considered part of any future solution. Despite the ridiculous claims of a deluded Afghan ex-minister while in Canada, the Afghan civilian population neither appreciates nor forgives being bombarded, even by mistakenly dropped "friendly bombs."

I'm not sure who he's speaking about here - perhaps Malalai Joya. I don't remember her saying the Afghan people were happy about being blown up, but maybe I missed something.

Going the wrong way up a dead-end street

I wonder if it's a gift or does it have to be learned.

I'm talking about the Harper government consistently backing the wrong horse, or whatever metaphor you might want to use.

"Critics at the Bali climate change conference are lumping Canada with the U.S., which they say is refusing to commit to deep emissions reductions, thereby hijacking the conference."

We are lumped in with the U.S., thanks to the Harperites and their forelock-tugging to the almighty Bush administration. Harper backed the invasion of Iraq, he thought the mining of southern Lebanon with unexploded cluster bombs by Israel was a "measured response", and now he thinks that backing Bush in his destruction of the planet is a good idea.

"There is a wrecking crew here in Bali, led by the Bush administration and its minions. Those minions continue to be the governments of Canada, Japan, Saudi Arabia and others," said Jennifer Morgan, of the Climate Change Network."

Canada is a key part of the dispute, Chao said. On Thursday, Environment Minister John Baird told members Canada is feeling first-hand the effects of climate change, but said the proposed targets are impossible for Canada to achieve.

Of course we can achieve them, but the oil and gas business might take a hit, and the major polluters would have to put some of their gazillions in profit into cleaning up their act. Can't have that. Profit is king, and they paid to get this government elected. They OWN it.

The plan being proposed by Baird would reduce emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 regardless of what comes out of the Bali conference. But the reductions would be from 2006 emissions levels, instead of 1990 levels, which many nations agree is a good starting point for emissions reductions.

"So right after this speech, Bangladesh's representative came out to call Canada's position immoral, dishonest, working against the interests of the planet and working against the interests of individual Canadians," Chao said.

I'm glad to see the rest of the world hammering the Canadian delegation. Do they know that they only represent a little over a third of Canadians? And that's whom they're protecting. The rest of us can just drown in their effluent or choke on their emissions.

"The members, on learning that Canada was trying to set targets at 2006 levels, said that Canada was being misleading and trying to undermine the trust of the talks here among nations," Chao said.

Don't worry. It's all under control.

Michael Klare says what all Canadians kind of thought anyway.

Thanks, Stevie, for further selling out the country.

From Thursday, Nov. 28th Democracy Now podcast:

Michael Klare, Professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College. He is author of several books including “Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum.” Klare’s latest article for the Nation is called Beyond the Age of Petroleum.

"Well, there’s a lot going on all at once that ensures that this oil crisis is qualitatively different from those of the past. And this is much more long-lasting. And one of the qualitative differences is that we have used up, over the past thirty years, most of the remaining oil in the global north—in the United States, in Canada, in Europe and other places that are near at hand and relatively under our control."

Well, Professor Klare, you might have Stevie and the boys (and a few of the girls) under your control, but you don't have the majority of the Canadian population under the imperialist thumb...yet.

The Tinkerbell Solution - Canada's asshat-pirational climate change goals

Nice going, Stevie. You've managed to bully the commonwealth countries into adopting a toothless environmental policy. Proud of yourself?

Canada gets its way: Commonwealth climate deal drops binding targets

Canada appears to have got its way at Commonwealth talks on climate change.

The 53-member organization has produced an agreement stripped of any reference to binding targets for greenhouse gas emissions.

Canada and Australia had been the lone holdouts against an earlier resolution that would have included such targets - and the Australian government has just been defeated in an election.

...The final Commonwealth deal says all countries should contribute to reducing emissions within a non-binding global target.

It's a problem, they all agree. They just hope something will happen ...somehow. I think they're called asshat-pirational goals...sorry - aspirational goals. Just like Tinkerbell - if we all hope really hard, the earth will recover.

"Instead the Lake Victoria Commonwealth Climate Change Plan points out the seriousness of the earth warming but recommends no targets or timelines for tackling greenhouse gas reduction.

The watered down plan is seen as a victory for Canada which is opposed to setting standards for industrialized polluting countries and not all polluters such as India and China."

But after all, Canada and Australia are behind this, aren't they? Hold on - a minor problem has occurred. Howard has been decisively booted out of office in Australia, and the new guy, Kevin Rudd, has said that he will sign Kyoto immediately.

Labor Party leader Kevin Rudd swept to power in Australian elections Saturday, ending an 11-year conservative era and promising major changes to policies on global warming and his country's role in the Iraq war.

...Rudd, a 50-year-old former diplomat who speaks fluent Chinese, urged voters to support him because Howard was out of touch with modern Australia and ill-equipped to deal with new-age issues such as climate change.

...But one of the biggest changes will be in Australia's approach to climate change. Rudd has nominated the issue as his top priority, and promises to immediately sign the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions.

Kind of lonely up there on your mountain top, is it, Mr. Harper? Maybe you won't be there for long.

That's my aspirational goal.

Morally superior slaughter in Afghanistan

The dead are equivalent in one way. They're dead - no matter who killed them, and their relatives still mourn, even if they were killed in a morally "superior" way.

NATO feels that it holds the moral high ground, however. The slaughter that it perpetrates is somehow morally superior to the slaughter attributable to the Taliban.

This is the stupidest and most morally vacant thing I've ever heard.

"Nato head Jaap de Hoop Scheffer says its forces are doing all they can to avoid Afghan civilian casualties.

After a meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, he said that Nato forces had changed their procedure to reduce the threat to civilians.

...Gen Scheffer appealed for understanding on this issue and said there was no moral equivalent between the civilians killed by the Taleban and those killed by Nato."

Señor Harper, ¿por qué no te callas?

If Colombia is suspending human rights and accepting massive aid from the U.S. as Bush's bestest friend in América del Sur, then the best thing for Canada to do is push through a free trade deal with them.

"In July Harper visited Colombia and scoffed at the suggestion Canada should withhold support for a trade deal due to human rights abuses. "We're not going to say, fix all your social, political and human-rights problems, and only then will we engage in trade relations with you," said Harper, at the time. That's a ridiculous position."

If Pakistan has suspended civil liberties and locked up dissenters, then the best thing for Canada to do is suggest that they be suspended from the Commonwealth.

"Canada has called for Pakistan's suspension from the Commonwealth following the anti-democratic crackdowns imposed during its emergency rule."

Punching above our weight, are we, Stevie? Let's just push a Pakistan teetering on the edge of a disaster over the edge, shall we? Got any more brilliant ideas?

I have a suggestion for you.

Señor Harper, ¿por qué no te callas?

Tolstoy on war

From Tolstoy's War and Peace:

“A thought that had long since and often occured to him during his military activities -- the idea that there is not and cannot be any science of war, and that therefore there can be no such thing as a military genius -- now appeared to him an obvious truth.”