anti-nucleaRist bloG #32/ 29 Oct 2009
Afghanistan is like disfranchising Hegemony
don’t relate to single-Payer being Medicare–not imagining truths
Web Address: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/peace-warrior
Send Mail Message
Bio: born in NYc, raised in san-Fran by age-3,… (More)
All Addison’s Blogs
Afghanistan is like disfranchising Hegemony
By “R” Addison at Oct 29, 2009
don’t relate to single-Payer being Medicare–not imagining truths
tO (www.CCjP.org) and peace-People,
As and the crimes against humanity by illegal invasion w N.A.T.O. forces continue the “aggression”, the Pakistans supported by u-S hegemony (Pentagon’s force & Congress’s inadeptness at law abiding) disfranchisement has happened. What do you call the lack ‘n lapses for CCjP not to call down the people of the publics in u-S, while the United Nations is placed on hold, as though the rest-of-the-world-does not exist, unless the legal black-box looks like Guantanamo Prison–an oasis in a foreign land protected by “hegemonic indiscrepancies” of trade is not diplomacy, but usury.
What is your lack of expression called, Ken & Mark? That Pres. Hamid Karzai is “only suspect” of corruption in the ranks of plutocrats or warlords need to come between the people of the tribes of Afghanistan those that overlap w Pakistan, and that ethnicity is not overlapping in Pakistan, Iran and elsewhere, but pushed by u-S hegemony, once again! AND the crimes against humanity: Pakistans supported by u-S hegemony, is more than Karzai’s attempts at staying in the middle “geographically” not having to enterprise “muddled-Conditionalism” every minute” seems to be the caustic side of “there’s a case here, you take id-Al to lower or higher paroxysms”? Or, the diplomacy is so “hegemonic that we need to go with what is said in dalliance of healthcare liberalism that does not include where the “Medicare: single-Payer” has gone.
All the people of metro-Little-D, the populous and the elites, need to have thoughts that correlate “reality” of definition, not imbecilic correlative so necessarily. That no war exists so impunity can become an over-stuffed “black-Box” is so paradoxical that CCjP does not have to have people pronouncements, but can change to nudelies: online visuals so crafting their sex-Life into any sphere of benign interests, ultra-personal! Did anyone ever relate to Kofi Annan’s speeches or was anarchism in 2008 DNC more important to “disfranchisement” of people on CCjP, I am asking? AND I have been asking, too, does NSDU-238 exist as first encumberment of “hegemony” or only maintains as the second “nuclear-Molecular” despicability, while “thermo-Nuclear(s)” in 49-silos on 24/7 in alert status in each of NE-WY-CO– since emplacement’s one after-the-other?
What brought de-Alert correlatives to metro-Denver, your lack in lapse of reading other’s e-Letters on CCjP? We progressives feel an intimacy should have brought that to you, for sense: how broad the scope against not continually presaging ahead without “correlatives” regarding silos, de-Alerting, NSDU-238, and not to protect those ‘silos’ and the despicable cover-up of gHW Bushwhacky in or of the massacre in Iraq of “the march-of-Death” by neo-Cons who felt support for his ‘grief’ for need in selecting g-Enron to a first-Term—by then nearly 8-full years of usury. While his counterpart Billy Clinton, in sacerdotal cacophony toward enmity totally lacked “acuity”. Pres. Billy Clinton could have (should have) brought gHW Bush to law’s respectable attribute—ending the throes of post-cold-War’s excess. One of the most heinous “crimes” by-passed by lameo’s uses of u-S Congress legislative Branch? Or, was that the “executive-Branch”. Tell me, does the pea in brain still encircling hurt to pronounce these “populous” TRUTHS or was 1991 a lousy “vintage” year, we must ask?
The addendum(s) of military ripping-Off the tax-payers while “single-Payer: Medicare” was untouchable, never happened as I grew up expecting single-Payer, and hearing “Medicare” is not to be segregationist! Therefore the history of crime against-the-People was prescient since 1958, in case you forgot to ask on this “website”! Disfranchising is not lots of fun, and you want to support what, because: or, you have read that NSDU-238 is a standard that only encapsulates Strontium-90 being an isotope that makes for better sandwiches in Iraq, of merely Strontium-89? You’ve made a dEMS website and left the broadest scopes on socio-Polity allowed elsewhere not to be invited, too! The truth to you is a black-box yet to be discovered when health hazards from poking thru their death-syndrome and cover-ups: dusts of “9-11” are not merely toxins of pulverized body parts and bits of (C-4) cistick-Uses thermite, carousing around the gird-Lies (what I call my metals materials–sculpturing)!
How do the people of Afghanistan “get” their HEALTHCARE? Do they announce an invasion by Cuba-medical-doctors or do they keep secret healthcare in that little black-Box buried in the minds of toxic-Ash at the foot of autocrats involvements with “cover-ups, deceits, more lies” of the u-S?
dEMS of little-D Afghanistan is like disfranchising “hegemony” but gOPS the uses of abuses by gHW Bush’s call in March of 1991, or whomever you think you’re covering-up-for–maybe raw-Goon actor did make that call to annihilate 238,000 retreating “civilians and a whole ‘army'”? Implausible, but the truths of 9-11 insider-Leaks, most possibly happened as the dust never cleared from one ground zero: that is test-sites post NSDU-238 being hidden since 1943, and Manhattan Project covering the ground in dust of Manhattan Island “demised” is a correlative adjunct nonetheless? Do you people hear this refrain at all, yet? The cover-up had best be the leading edge of your never words lack-of-principle: addendum of principle.
Afghanistan in the news…Greens and Socialists know best these topics in discussion pertain to “opium becoming heroin” and then “trade” w capitalist countries, is great cover by the “heroin triangle” of Laos (along the Mekong River southeast-Asia) for selling and maintaining “warlords” who protect decadence thru denigration of female populous. That governance by the jirgas in each “township” makes for a continuation of where people’s heads are at, in direct relationship w “tribalism” because that is their forum of populous participation, better than ours unless we’re morosely more democratic than not dissenting “against” NSDU-usages, because the secrecy finally came-Off the back burner of u-S politics equating “illegal-Invasions thru cIAS/ Pentagons, since 1950” so-called war-Theory post wars-of hegemony and NSDU-238 cover-up “attrition” the Hegemonic call word of the 1960’s? And who said the hippie movement was not “anti-War and anti-Banks, and anti-Segregation”. dEMS and gOPS are too running scared. The challenges of Afghanistan have not been met by u-S “progressives” yet. Not in a summary, such as this one–or hopefully.
Afghanistan and progressivism in the people is stronger in Afghanistan than in u-S:
- a) Afghan police: 10 dead in attack on UN in Kabul (apeco filed) 10-28-09 by Rahim Faiez and Amirshah, Associated Press Writers – -Yahoo http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091028/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan
- b) Coordinated Attacks Kill 6 UN Workers as US Troops Suffer Deadliest Month of 8-Year Afghan War ) DEM Now 10-28-09
- c) DEM Now 10-28-09 UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Killings, Philip Alston: Record AfPak Drone Attacks Under Obama May Violate International Law
- d) “A Woman Among Warlords”: Afghan Democracy Activist Malalai Joya Defies Threats to Challenge US Occupation, Local Warlords DEM Now 10-28-09
- e) BACKING A REAL LOSER IN AFGHANISTAN Tuesday, October 27, 2009 Posted by Jim Hightower http://jimhightower.com//node/6971#at
- f) Karzai’s brother said to be on CIA payroll: report Tue Oct 27, 10:29 pm ET
- g) Afghan President Karzai’s Fall From Grace (NPR audio report) Afghan President Karzai’s Fall From Grace 10-26-09
If democracy is not your prescience, then why are you running scared? Liberty in excess will only bring you back to democracy, or your dropping out for– autocracy to become the neo-Con’s morose overtures of “belligerence”, or the hegemonyites maintaining no-Reduction for disarmaments of thermo-Nuclear weapons, or NSDU-238 continuations the necessity for plutocratic-Propaganda enticements, more use! (how may I entertain you with peace)…
I’ve explained the accoutrement of latest scopes “Afghanistan” because having lived in a township, there 1981, I did have to go in front of the local “jirga”. That, in which case became the opportunity of getting to know Afghanistan—at the roots of people, tribal, not ethnic, but secular. They, the civilians—no warlord present– was understood by me that theirs was this “trait” of desire in overture. Peace in other words, as the peace-Diplomat: poet, for what they understood me to be without excise. I chose to place the summarizing to further illustrate context that more is yet necessary to fulfill the enlightened “cause” that we progressives must atone as amenity: needed?
I’ve localized my extroversion onto more introversion. One more thought that another blog-web and activist, has posted what I’ve felt was needed back in fall 2001 in the initial throes of blaming “al Qaeda” but not holding forth that a “Large-Breach” in the 9-11 intel-Gence epic of and on that day resulted in cistick-use: c-4 demolition of “three” total buildings that could never have been brought down otherwise!, Afghanistan got invaded by a sequitor of non-Parable, rather than an import of factuality know i.e. more renown than proven, and more grotesque because the wantonness was nor yet p[arable to “oil-Resource” ripoff of that nation-State, mostly tribalist, secondarily ethnic, and defensely protected: tribalistically, anyhow?
“The Taliban 18-month withdrawal schedule fits in with Afghan opinion. In the BBC/ABC/ ARD poll, 21% of Afghans said US-led forces should leave immediately; 16% said between 6 months and a year from now; and 14% within two years. So 51% of Afghans want withdrawal within two years.” please read: Rai Milan’s blog post… What Do Afghans Want? Withdrawal – But Not Too Fast – and A Negotiated Peace October, 07 2009 by Rai, Milan http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/commentaries/4005%u2028 in this text he sights numerous statistical facts, some factors not explained by u-S newspaper-Print because of odious obfuscation by corporate neo-Con’s excising of news from both sides, or report-able not contents-Context but excluded because of autocratic-Ascendancy, if you will?
The final outcome on seething non restraint of u-S populous enraged against “Pres. Hamid Karzai” is best heard. The audio from kPFA-fm dot org, has the focus of what my own understanding of history has been altho the need for universal: single-Payer (three operations followed by two more) healthcare made for living curbside– for 4.5 mos. in little-D this summer was twisted, and pain focuses on draining “human energy” you may find as I have!
The u-S populous “status-Quo” is not so worthy of following unless you’re a validated “conservative” and you propose to dodge “neo-Con’s” and allow their belligerence is better seen, virtually, that mannerist “way”. That the news-Media is yet corporate “autocracy” and the wars of gloss-over reportage is also “military Hegemony” helps me stay focused upon where plutocracy does the maintaining of insouciant “propaganda” . Therefore, since this article only came into being yester afternoon (scheduling) my werk routine finished by 6:30 pm. and my photography finished @ 10:15… how could I have gotten this to you on a sat. evening. I listened to V. J. Prishad, 3 X in other words, and each time picked up more gems (of truth). So, for a summary on “Afghanistan” I recommend listening and taking notes. The time span of the one-hour program is 23:35 thru 39:42 minutes @ http://kpfa. org/archive/id/55723 please, go to the orge-Nal media @ Uprising Radio, for October 31, 2009 – 11:00am…
Poor people in this, our d-F country, are in need of help, because they can help themselves. However, NSDU-238 won’t help anyone encircling the globe in micro-Particles and not being cleaned-Up in Afghanistan, Kosovo and Iraq lands is one major impoverished, conditionalized extreme—for sure. Approach these rapprochements —use rubberized gloves for windshield scraping enticements!
The De-alert thermo-Nuclear weapons movement continues to place monotony ahead of insipid mono-Tony. These weapons on 24/7 since 1972, suck dusty gravel. Silos of NE-WY-CO ought to be “vigil’d” monthly in little-D…sooner than Copenhagen vote of mid-December, hopefully?
luv from the peace-Warrior,
p.s. tribalism is democracy to the mountain peoples, while tyranny is the “cabalism” of maintaining capitalism as “illegal-Trade” which invites military-Hegemony…
note: <10-30-09> next, I found a blogger @ same blog post site, whose antipathy was to cover the “negociations” scene of Afghanistan, as he’d studied the outlook in stats published and came across w some truths—those that parable good mention both because of having “lived in Afghan.” I was wont to regale the beguile mused but missed. As there was none, and as the statistics were non-coercive, the facts seemed morosely more together. Here’s a copy of that post—which I’d tried to correct before online contact here @ sRC became non-usable to connections…
What Do Afghans Want? Withdrawal – But Not Too Fast – and A Negotiated Peace October, 07 2009 by Rai, Milan
Milan Rai’s ZSpace Page/ Join ZSpace
In his major speech on Afghanistan on 4 September, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown emphasized Britain’s self interest in prosecuting the war in Afghanistan: ‘We are in Afghanistan as a result of a hard-headed assessment of the terrorist threat facing Britain.’ In this, he was only following the lead of US President Barack Obama, who launched his new strategy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan at the end of March with the warning that: ‘if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban – or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged – that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can’.
Neither the Prime Minister nor the President often speak of the wishes of the Afghan people. But these wishes, so far as they can be known, ought to be at the centre of British policy.
What we know is that the majority of people in Afghanistan (77%) want an end to the airstrikes that have killed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Afghan civilians. We also know that the majority of Afghans (64%) want a negotiated end to the conflict, and are willing to accept the creation of a coalition government including the Taliban leadership.
We also know that a majority of Afghans oppose the Obama surge that is increasing the number of foreign troops in the country. 73% of Afghans think that US-led forces in the country should either be decreased in number (44%) or ‘kept at the current level’ (29%). Only 18% of Afghans favour an increase.
Fear of the Taliban
These are the results of a nationwide poll commissioned by the BBC, ABC News (USA) and ARD (Germany), in which 1,534 Afghans were interviewed in all of the country’s 34 provinces between 30 December 2008 and 12 January 2009.
The poll found enormous hostility to the Taliban. 82% of people said they would prefer the present government; only 4% favoured a Taliban government. 90% of people said they opposed Taliban fighters. The Taliban were seen as the biggest danger to the country by 58% of people; the United States was in fourth place with 8% (just ahead of ‘local commanders’ – a euphemism for US-backed warlords).
‘Who do you blame the most for the violence that is occurring in the country?’ The Taliban came top with 27%; al-Qa’eda/foreign jihadis were next with 22%. In third place were ‘US/Ameri-can forces/Bush/US government/America/NATO/ISAF forces’ with 21%.
69% of people thought it was a good thing that the US-led forces had come to Aghanistan to bring down the Taliban. (Down from 88% in 2006.)
64% of Afghans thought (in January 2009) that ‘The Taliban are the same as before’, and had not grown more moderate.
Despite all this, a solid 64% of Afghans thought ‘the government in Kabul should negotiate a settlement with Afghan Taliban in which they are allowed to hold political offices if they agree to stop fighting’. However, Afghans favoured preconditions to such talks: 71% said the government should ‘negotiate only if the Taliban stop fighting’.
64% of British people also think ‘America and Britain be willing to talk to the Taliban in Afghanistan in order to achieve a peace deal’. (Sunday Times, 15 March 2009)
Talks are only meaningful if the other side is willing to play their part. It seems, in the case of Afghanistan, that there is serious interest in a national reconciliation process on the part of the Taliban and the Karzai administration – but that these negotiations are being blocked by the United States and Britain, who are determined to achieve a military victory.
The Taliban position
The Taliban’s current demands were set out in a New York Times article on 20 May: ‘The first demand was an immediate pullback of American and other foreign forces to their bases, followed by a cease-fire and a total withdrawal from the country over the next 18 months. Then the current government would be replaced by a transitional government made up of a range of Afghan leaders, including those of the Taliban and other insurgents. Americans and other foreign soldiers would be replaced with a peacekeeping force drawn from predominantly Muslim nations, with a guarantee from the insurgent groups that they would not attack such a force. Nationwide elections would follow after the Western forces left.’
A negotiator said the Taliban leaders also added two more conditions: an end to the drone attacks in Pakistan’s tribal areas, and the release of some Taliban prisoners.
On 2 April, the Independent reported that preliminary talks between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Taliban seemed to have ‘yielded a significant shift away from the Taliban’s past obsession with repressive rules and punishments governing personal behaviour.’
It was said that the Taliban were now prepared to commit themselves to ‘refraining from banning girls’ education, beating up taxi drivers for listening to Bollywood music, or measuring the length of mens’ beards.’
Burqas would be ‘strongly recommended’ for women in public, but not be compulsory.
The Taliban’s wider political demands appear to have also softened considerably since 2007, when they demanded ‘control of 10 southern provinces, a timetable for withdrawal of foreign troops, and the release of all Taliban prisoners within six months’. (Guardian, 15 October 2007)
The Taliban 18-month withdrawal schedule fits in with Afghan opinion. In the BBC/ABC/ ARD poll, 21% of Afghans said US-led forces should leave immediately; 16% said between 6 months and a year from now; and 14% within two years.
So 51% of Afghans want withdrawal within two years.
In May 2007, the upper house of the Afghan parliament voted for a military ceasefire and negotiations with the Taliban, and for a date to be set for the withdrawal of foreign troops. (AP, 10 May 2007)
A staged withdrawal also fits in with British opinion. In a Guardian/BBC Newsnight poll, published on 13 July, 42% of voters wanted British troops withdrawn immediately; and a further 14% wanted withdrawal “by the end of the year” (ie within five months). (36% of people said they should “stay until they are no longer needed”.)
A Times poll published on 22 July showed that two-thirds of those polled believed that British troops should be withdrawn either now (34%) or (33%) ‘within the next year or so’ (i.e. within 12 months).
So that’s 56% wanting withdrawal within months, and 67% wanting withdrawal within a year.
A staged withdrawal also fits in with US public opinion. In a New York Times/CBS News poll, 55% of voters said US troops should be withdrawn within two years (31% said within one year). (24 September)
The BBC/ABC/ARD poll showed that 63% of Afghans supported the presence of US troops in Afghanistan (but 77% wanted an end to airstrikes). Only 8% supported the presence of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.
It seems that Afghans want an international presence in the country to prevent rule by the Taliban, who they fear and detest. That international presence ought to be supplied by independent forces uninvolved in the US-led invasion and occupation, and controlled by the UN General Assembly (rather than the US-dominated Security Council).
It is impossible to take the Taliban’s position at face value – particularly on social controls – but there seems to be no alternative to a genuine negotiated solution to the Afghan conflict, in line with Afghan public opinion, Afghan parliamentary opinion, and British public opinion.
Britain and the US should halt their ‘surge’ into Afghanistan, ceasefire, withdraw to their bases, draw down troops and allow a national reconciliation process to take place. The future of the Afghan people must be determined according to the wishes of the Afghan people.
How may I entertain you with peace…
Wars are not good for us—americanism is not belligerence killing civilians, the globa-Village patriot
turn-Off the Taliban-Hats & the drug: war-Lords,
the global-Village patriot
–notes: z-Space post on blog #28 apeco filed 10-29-09; comments– yet in need of copy and word edit-Spelling “R” @ sRC 10-30-09
Tags/ single-Payer, being Medicare, Pakistans, Conditionalism, diplomacy, hegemonic, gHW Bushwhacky, NSDU-238, What Do Afghans Want?, withdrawal, Strontium-90, Taliban, hats, belligerence, V. J. Prishad, Kofi Annan’s speeches, new-Rome, US-dominated, Security Council, socio-polity, thermite,