Message Of Felicitation Of The Esteemed Amir-Ul-Momineen On The Occasion Of Eid-Ul-F

[unknownprince]

Several Gulf States also support them. Why should any Afghan fight with sticks and stones?

Afghans fight for the freedom of their country from the US occupation. It matters not to the Afghan if aliens from Mars have common interest in seeing the US leave their country.

At this moment, this is all they care about. This is why support for the Taliban has increased, and their reach has spread.

US report shows Taliban support in Afghanistan, blames Karzai | America-Canada | World Bulletin

[unknownprince]

Several Gulf States also support them, more so, and more avidly. Why should any Afghan fight with sticks and stones? Does that mean resistance is invalid? NO.

Afghans fight for the freedom of their country from the US occupation. It matters not to the Afghan if aliens from Mars have common interests in seeing the US leave their country.

At this moment, this is all they care about. This is why support for the Taliban has increased, and their reach has spread. On the contrary, many many are very angry as to why Pakistan has supported the US.

US report shows Taliban support in Afghanistan, blames Karzai | America-Canada | World Bulletin




Pakistan was forced with money and coercion to play a double game. Contrast this with nuclear armed North Korea who for lack of a better term show the whole world the middle finger. Mind-set matters in this world, and nations are either slave like or free. Pakistan and India both got their "independence" not out of a armed resistance, but pretty much through begging. Hence, the consequences for such a feeble path are seen today where they have no independent foreign policy at all. Indians and Pakistanis are similar after all.

This is changing, not out of new found feeling of independence with the Pakistan puppets, but mostly because the US has sunk. Yes, you will be unemployed for a long time.


Hekmatyar urges Pakistan, Iran to end US support


Hekmatyar urges Pakistan, Iran to end US support

Saturday, September 03, 2011






PESHAWAR: Former Afghan prime minister Engineer Gulbadin Hekmatyar has urged Pakistan and Iran to stop supporting Americans against Afghan nation.

In his message issued on Eidul Fitr, he said the United States had also prepared the same plan for Pakistan and Iran like that of Afghanistan and Iraq. Governments of Pakistan and Iran should stop searching their own benefits in the blood of Afghans, Hekmatyar, who is chief of Hizeb-e-Islami, said. The Afghan resistance leader rejected the formation of peace commission, saying the withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan was the only solution to Afghan crisis.

Hehmatyar observed the recently formed peace commission was making hollow slogans and was trying to create groups within Mujahideen on the basis of dollars, but only the fools could be deceived as the American were searching honourable way out from Afghanistan.

Without naming anybody, he said some (of leaders) within the commission had invited American to attack Afghanistan and had also asked Iran to control Hirat, Mazar and Takhar and later handed over it to them. The same forces, he said had control over the Afghan army and police, and were fighting under American command against Afghan nation. He said majority of the Afghan nation had not participated in Afghan elections, which was a drama staged by the Americans to bring those people in power, who had already sold their loyalties. He said Americans had no other choice expect withdrawal from Afghanistan.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Several Gulf States also support them. Why should any Afghan fight with sticks and stones?

Afghans fight for the freedom of their country from the US occupation. It matters not to the Afghan if aliens from Mars have common interest in seeing the US leave their country.

At this moment, this is all they care about. This is why support for the Taliban has increased, and their reach has spread.

US report shows Taliban support in Afghanistan, blames Karzai | America-Canada | World Bulletin

America-Canada
Updating: 17:07, 29 April 2010 Thursday

US report shows Taliban support in Afghanistan, blames Karzai
Ignoring the effects of years of invasion and civilian killings, US report levelled all criticism at US-installed Karzai.

that is the date of your article

here's an article from November of 2010 that tells a different story

Poll: Majority of Afghans Support Talks With Taliban | CNSnews.com

Poll: Majority of Afghans Support Talks With Taliban

Tuesday, November 09, 2010

By Katharine Houreld, Associated Press

Kabul, Afghanistan (AP) - An overwhelming majority of Afghans support the government's efforts to negotiate peace with Taliban insurgents, according to a poll released Tuesday that ranks insecurity as the top concern among citizens, followed by unemployment and corruption.

Some 83 percent of Afghan adults back efforts to secure the country through negotiations with armed, anti-government groups, the survey conduct
ed by the Asia Foundation said. That's up from 71 percent last year.

The report also said that 55 percent of Afghan adults had no sympathy at all for the armed opposition groups -- up from 36 percent last year -- and another 26 percent had only a little sympathy.

Moreover, 81 percent -- 10 percent more than last year -- support programs to lure Taliban foot soldiers off the battlefield by providing assistance, jobs and housing to those who lay down their arms and reintegrate into society.

doesn't really sound like supporting the Taliban to me

[unknownprince]

Why can't you answer this post. The funny thing is you continue to spread false stories even when they are disproved. Use a poll from Kabul, make a fool out of yourself. the tribes will always control Afghanistan.

Pakistan was forced with money and coercion to play a double game. Contrast this with nuclear armed North Korea who for lack of a better term show the whole world the middle finger. Mind-set matters in this world, and nations are either slave like or free. Pakistan and India both got their "independence" not out of a armed resistance, but pretty much through begging. Hence, the consequences for such a feeble path are seen today where they have no independent foreign policy at all. Indians and Pakistanis are similar after all.

This is changing, not out of new found feeling of independence with the Pakistan puppets, but mostly because the US has sunk. Yes, you will be unemployed for a long time.


Hekmatyar urges Pakistan, Iran to end US support


Hekmatyar urges Pakistan, Iran to end US support

Saturday, September 03, 2011






PESHAWAR: Former Afghan prime minister Engineer Gulbadin Hekmatyar has urged Pakistan and Iran to stop supporting Americans against Afghan nation.

In his message issued on Eidul Fitr, he said the United States had also prepared the same plan for Pakistan and Iran like that of Afghanistan and Iraq. Governments of Pakistan and Iran should stop searching their own benefits in the blood of Afghans, Hekmatyar, who is chief of Hizeb-e-Islami, said. The Afghan resistance leader rejected the formation of peace commission, saying the withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan was the only solution to Afghan crisis.

Hehmatyar observed the recently formed peace commission was making hollow slogans and was trying to create groups within Mujahideen on the basis of dollars, but only the fools could be deceived as the American were searching honourable way out from Afghanistan.

Without naming anybody, he said some (of leaders) within the commission had invited American to attack Afghanistan and had also asked Iran to control Hirat, Mazar and Takhar and later handed over it to them. The same forces, he said had control over the Afghan army and police, and were fighting under American command against Afghan nation. He said majority of the Afghan nation had not participated in Afghan elections, which was a drama staged by the Americans to bring those people in power, who had already sold their loyalties. He said Americans had no other choice expect withdrawal from Afghanistan.

[unknownprince]

Dude, your stupid, quit wasting peoples time here in your never ending quest to prove you are right when you are wrong.

Your pathetic and idiotic attitude is seen when you try to deny the very existence of Omar Hotak.

how retarded can one get?

Keep supporting Ahmad Rashid, you exposed yourself as a supporter of the US war against Afghanistan. Good job !

Might as well start championing Farhat Taj ANDERSEN too LOL

[ScimitarXEdge]

Why can't you answer this post. The funny thing is you continue to spread false stories even when they are disproved. Use a poll from Kabul, make a fool out of yourself. the tribes will always control Afghanistan

I already did, Hizbi Islami oppose and fight the Taliban. remember that post a few pages back?

here let me remind you

http://www.pashtunforums.com/503091-post144.html

instead of cutting and pasting over again and spamming as you do.

[Catya Sher]

Ashraf is NOT spamming.
He's one of the brightest members ; don't insult him
so ruthlessly, Scimitar.

By the way you are going to have trouble finding the right
lady when you are looking like this - !

That article about Gulbuddin surprised me.
I was just deciding that he may be making some deal
behind the scenes with americans.
Gulbuddin seemed more malleable in recent years -
according to reports which are so often wrong anyway -
than Mullah Omar.

The two should hammer out a way to work together.
I fear Gulbuddin has his own agenda, though.

But time for him to set that aside and make peace with Mullah Omar.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Dude, your stupid, quit wasting peoples time here in your never ending quest to prove you are right when you are wrong.

Your pathetic and idiotic attitude is seen when you try to deny the very existence of Omar Hotak.

how retarded can one get?

Keep supporting Ahmad Rashid, you exposed yourself as a supporter of the US war against Afghanistan. Good job !

Might as well start championing Farhat Taj ANDERSEN too LOL

It's not about supporting Ahmed Rashid, Ahmed Rashid, shows the truth, even Barakzai Abdali supports Michael Schauer who thinks that Americans should just mass exterminate Afghans, because he says somethings that he feels are accurate. However Ahmed Rashid's own explanations are in regards to Pakistani ISI's involvement in radicalization of AFghanistan and its negative impact. To claim he just wants America to kill Afghans is intellectually dishonest distortion.

In fact if anything you supporting the ISI and Taliban oppression of Muslims exposes you as a traitor of Islam.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

this is a "meta-response" at best; Ahmed Rashid's own words should be used as a measure of Ahmed Rashid's intentions and motivations; and as we see Ahmed Rashid's words in DemocracyNow pretty much shutdown UnknownPakistaniServant's garble.

"Descent Into Chaos": Ahmed Rashid on How the US Aid to "War on Terror" Ally Pakistan is Aiding the Taliban



"And after interviewing the bestselling author I had no doubt his concepts influenced the President's decision to "finish the job" in Afghanistan, a doctrine announced by Obama on Tuesday which aides said will likely include a surge of approximately 30,000"



You're dscrediting Ahmed Rashid because of what others have said of him?

Christiopher Hitchen's once said this
What is American?: new identities in ... - Google Books

"I am an Anti-Zionist. I'm one of those people of Jewish descent who believes that Zionism would be a mistake even if there were no Palestinians."


does this statement become untrue because Christopher Hitchen's said it? Come on, let's leave the childish, amateurish logical fallacies for Pakistani Cronies like AshrafGhaljay and Imperiaist slaves like Toramana.




You're doing what's called in Logic Circles as "Quote Mining"

This is the full Ahmed Rashid quote , response to Michael Hughes question.



Hardly clarion call for Neo-Cosn at all,considering it was the Neo-Cons who supported, and promoted the galvanizaion of Warlorsd against the Taliban. Sounds like he understands the tyranny of the Taliban and the Warlords mutually.

Even Asshat Gayguy, knows the tyranny of the warlords.







Musharaf was met by the same men, and yet the Taliban were aligned with his ISI cronies?

Salamoona,

I think I agree with you that even a liar's words, whether it be Hitchens, Scheuer, Rashid, Zakaria can have modicums of truth. I myself have cited Rashid on several occasions. I think that some of his information is utilizable, but he is no hero by any means, nor does he walk into the discussion agendaless. I will explain to you just why I think Scheuer, despite his admitted blood thirst, is still a reasonably valid source compared to Rashid, from which to derive a view of what policy is, and what policy ought to be.

Regarding the Huffington Post article, I think Michael Hughes's assessment is an honest one. He spoke to Rashid directly and has no vested interest in debunking, maligning, or undoing Rashid. To the contrary, he is promoting Rashid's importance. By your standards, pretty much everything we have by everyone is second hand knowledge. We also have not heard the Taliban's shuraas own words regarding Pakistani power projection through them, but you are still assuming that this is their objective.

For instance, even with the wikileaks post, we have a 4rd hand report from US diplomats that came from US intelligence, that heard from NDS services that a meeting took place between Hamid Gul and Taliban assassins. So if, in a defense of Rashid, we demand his own words, then we ought to give each of these parties the same respect, including the neocons.

Moreover, the neocon mantra of spreading democracy is clearly endorsed by Rashid here:

"Ahmed Rashid: I think every country should have the chance of building a ... Democracy is still the best possible system that we have."

He supplements this by terming the Loya Jirga as being a more legitimate process here:

"AHMED RASHID: Well, this is a country that is coming out of 25 years of war, and I think in choosing the delegates to the loya jirga and the loya jirga itself, there was an element of manipulation — by the warlords, by the government — but there was also a very legitimate process going on. If you saw the role that the women played in that for the first time, many of those women were there — were chosen in fact to be there, rather than being elected — they were very outspoken. Many of the delegates were very outspoken. Rafiq Shahir was opposing the warlord of Herat — Ismail Khan — and spoke up very strongly about him and received a lot of support. So yes, there was corruption, there was manipulation, but at the same time it was a legitimate process."

Here is his support for the secular constitution of Afghanistan:
"AHMED RASHID: Well, the bottom line for the constitution was that it was passed, but it needs to be implemented."

Here is another statement where he supposed the legitimacy of the Afghan government:
"AHMED RASHID: Oh, I think it’s made a very big difference in the sense that people certainly feel that there is a — the rule of law is not necessarily implemented, but there is a rule of law there which can be implemented. And I think the debate over the constitution was very healthy, it really gave people a taste of democracy."

Then here, in his own words, are his continued support for American presence:

"AHMED RASHID: Well, there will be an enormous disillusionment I think and we already have the Taliban coming back — they’re on the doorstep in southern Afghanistan. They still have the same ideology as they did before 9/11. It will certainly be very dangerous. I think the big danger is that the international community and the Americans are going to say after the October elections, “Whew! That’s over, let’s all go home now. Pack up and go home. Afghanistan is now a democracy — full stop.”
And that’s precisely the moment when you need to step up aid, you need to step up disarmament, you need to step up reconstruction, when an even greater commitment by the international community is needed to solidify the electoral process for at least another three to five years. You don’t want the next U.S. administration coming and saying, “We can just walk away from here now.” That would be absolutely criminal, I think, both for the Afghan people and in general for the war against terrorism.

And then here is the clinicher SXE;

"And that has to continue. So, I’m very optimistic. The Afghans want that to continue. They don’t want the Americans to leave. They see the American presence there has been very important in order to be able to reconstruct their country."

Who is he to make this sort of statement on behalf of the Afghan people?

He goes on to urge the removal of Khan in Herat, which I think is idiotic when you compare Ismail Khan to the other fools:

"On the other hand, Ismail Khan probably needs to be removed because it’s very unlikely that you can have a free and fair election in Herat with Ismail Khan there."

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/ep...d-rashid/1286/

[BarakzaiAbdali]

It's not about supporting Ahmed Rashid, Ahmed Rashid, shows the truth, even Barakzai Abdali supports Michael Schauer who thinks that Americans should just mass exterminate Afghans, because he says somethings that he feels are accurate. However Ahmed Rashid's own explanations are in regards to Pakistani ISI's involvement in radicalization of AFghanistan and its negative impact. To claim he just wants America to kill Afghans is intellectually dishonest distortion.

In fact if anything you supporting the ISI and Taliban oppression of Muslims exposes you as a traitor of Islam.

Now regarding Mike Scheuer... I think this is the reason I am avidly in touch with his work:

You have ideologues who write in order to promote interventions that are generally fool's errands. Their goal is to hoist on a people a secular system and set of democratic principles and a capitalistic system that is foreign to them (Rashid, Farid Zakaria, the neoconservatives, Chris Hitchens)... then you have folks who are pragmatic loyalists. These people urge interventions in the Muslim world and in Latin America to further American power projection at the expense of American national security... but they believe that they are actually strengthening America and promoting a Pax Americana. In fact, neocon Max Boot has more or less admitted that he seeks empire.

Mike Sheuer is that brand of patriot and that reluctant soldier that American truly needs. Why else would he endorse Dr. Paul? Dr. Scheuer is not out looking for enemies.

He wrote his texts, the most celebrated of which is Imperial Hubris, so that he could halt American interventions and games abroad. He understood that these interventions are going to create generational problems and turn America against her "stated" inceptional goals ( a whole different debate for another day as to whether taking a continent and expunging the red man from it allows a set of old white men from Britian to call themselves moral or not). His own enemies endorsed these texts (Bin Ladin in particular) because they realized that Scheuer was broadcasting that their anger stems not from wanting to put a burqa on Britney Spears, but rather because America intervenes and installs dictators to her own benefit world round.

He, like an analytic engineer offers the American people two options:
1) The moral and the better option: Stop screwing around in other people's home lands and quit supporting Israel where there is no national security beneft... stop backing the Al Sauds and get rid of this ridiculous energy dependence that leads us to go to war if our supply is threatened.

2) If the Americans, as a nation, decide to not do what makes sense then they better be ready to kill whoever and whatever is necessary (which goes against their supposed moral founding principles of not supporting worldwide tyrannies).

I think these stances are very reasonable for a Central Intelligence analyst.

Here is his own response to Bill Maher, which appears to dismay Mr. Maher:

Bill Maher interviews Michael Scheuer - YouTube

Mr. Rashid on the other hand, may offer some pertinent information (e.g. his breakdown charts of the tribal composition of the Taliban are elegent and informative)... but his policy promotions and democratization advocacy points, utilizing American power projection to nation build, is very irresponsible and war hawkish.

So I shall take Scheuer to Rashid any day as Scheuer seeks to extricate his country from these imbroglios.

And he is certainly right about killing his way out of Afghanistan. At this juncture, were America to turn all its fire power onto Afghanistan, they could reduce it to green glass within 5 hours. That would extricate America from a costly war that is going to end in failure. He however, hopes that cooler heads prevail and that America completely packs up and leaves this failed venture.

I would certainly, where I a decision maker, want such honest and informed analysis.

Take his stance on Libya. He predicted clearly that the NATO powers would have to introduce ground troops and supplement their air power to win. He hoped America would divest and mind its own business. Lo and behold, we are discovering that NATO/CIA sent in trainers and special forces.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

@BarakzaiAbdali and unknownAshrafGhaljay

Unfortunately, things aren't always in black and white. Of course, Ahmed Rashid supports the US invasion of Afghanistan, that's not really a secret. However, he is also very critical of what the US is now doing there, how it is conducting its operations and how it is doing everything wrong. In fact, many journalists and experts on this war now agree that the Taliban have support at the grassroots and a lot of resistance to this continuing (and failing) American occupation even comes from ordinary people, who are unaffiliated with any of the better known Taliban networks.

So who or what must one support? The US occupation, which has failed to deliver ordinary Afghans from the war and violence that they have been seeing for the last 30 years and which has not developed anything in Afghanistan? Or the Taliban, from which ultimately, the same group will come back into power and the civilians who are fighting now will return to their fields and once again, the Afghanistan that we became so well-acquainted with from 1995 to 2001 will come into existence?

The Americans came in after 9/11 to flush out all the filth that had accumulated in Afghanistan in the last 20 (1979-2001) years (by their own doing, no less). They promised development, funding and we all believed them. In fact, if you read what the British and the Americans wrote about what intended to do there just as their invasion began, their main goal was to quickly eliminate the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and begin work on development projects (winning hearts and minds). Were they going to establish long-term bases there as they have in South Korea, Germany and Japan? Yes, of course, the US isn't a charity organization but if the US was prepared to make up for its mistakes of the past, eliminate the terrorists that it helped nurture to defeat the Soviets and help Afghanistan develop, just as it helped Germany and Japan, what would be the harm in that?

At that time, most Afghans were in favor of that American intervention in Afghanistan. Firstly, because the Taliban were vassals to Islamabad. Secondly, they were incapable of developing the country and instead, took it back a thousand years as far as human development is concerned. Thirdly, their rule was tyrannical - perhaps even worse than that of the PDPA governments of the 70s in some regards. Fourth, after 9/11, the whole world believed that the US would genuinely try to rebuild Afghanistan and given the public support for the war, huge amounts of cash would flow into Afghanistan.

In any case, the war started with the bombing of many Afghans towns and villages and by the time Afghanistan became secure, more Afghan civilians had died when compared to the casualty-count of 9/11. And then all the resources of the Western world were squandered in a useless war in Iraq. That's when they lost the Afghan people. Instead of rebuilding, the coalition forces got involved in a full-scale guerrilla war.

In any case, my point is that in both cases, the Afghan people are doomed. If the Mujahideen win, a civil war would ensue that would result in the establishment of another tyrannical theocratic regime. If the US stays, Afghans will continue to suffer because the US has become an occupier and not a liberator. It's a Catch-22 situation in which ultimately, the biggest loser is the ordinary Pashtun.

The second issue now:
Nation building and your question of what is wrong with letting the Americans build up institutions.

I think it is deeply immoral and lazy to demand an outside power, known to attach strings to all its moves, build up your country for you. That nation has obligations to its own citizens and they neither want to waste their money on building Afghanistan when their own citizens deserve to beneft from America's blood and treasure.

I addressed this issue previously to ChelseaFan. Here a series of my responses regarding expecting other nations to do the job for you (a very corrupt Arab Monarchy notion of how to run a country, if I might say so... which I find interesting since the general Pashtun nationalist stance is to hate all things Arab):

http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...43/index3.html

"Italy, Germany etc are their own (The Americans) ilk. They derive from there so what would it matter to them to rule and benefit their older brethren. The rise of an Islamic power by their own hand, that threatens interests such as Israel and their Saudi monarchy will never happen. Keep dreaming (you admit as much with your above commentary). Regarding Japan, lets face it buddy, you farsiwaan are not to the level of the Japanese. They were an empire that conquered China and were, at baseline, technologically advanced. So America had a quality product to work with. What do you have? You cannot even spell gaurantee and yet you, like the Indian you are, believe that American Gulab sweets are going to rain down on you? Deal with the article I posted showing that you manage what is given to you ineptly. You dont deserve such technological advancements because you have proven you cannot sustain them. As I said, the Russians supposedly would go on and develop "institutions" for your brethren across the Amu Darya."

"1) What writ or guarantee or promise do you have from the Americans, who have, per the available historical record, never left a land that was pacified by their army? Iraq? Give me a break, Maliki has yet to ask them to officially leave. And when I say leave, I mean in all capacities (trainers, special forces, mercenaries, etc). You, a blind man, are attempting to sell a broke down car to those that can see with clear eyes.

There is one nation that they left in totality and it is called Vietnam.

"2) It is obvious your goals have nothing at all to do with Afghan autonomy. After all, how decrepit and lacking in merit are you that you require an outside power to build up your institutions? Whats to say that you can maintain these institutions once they are handed to you? The puppets in power are the failures, the sycophants, the yes men, who never were successfull in the West... and you expect them to be able to maintain modern western institutions?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010302175.html

Let me give you a clear and clean example: Dr. Faizullah Kakar... deputy Health minister:
This guy is in charge of rebuilding Afghanistan's shattered medical insfrastructure? What a joke. The guy releases press statements every few days about how Afghans shouldnt eat fatty foods (really Dr. Saib, are you this oblivious to the ground level situation? when their bellys cannot get any food?)... or about pollution levels. Contrast that when America's NIH leadership under the likes of technologist physician and radiologist leader Elias Zerhouni. Its a sick sick joke, and ironically, he has no medical training."

"Maintenance of freedom indefinitely? Really? How? By following the example of the neighboring istans? Do you mean the hegemony in Tajikistan or Uzbekistan? Those bastions of independent thought and massive success (sarcasm). Let me tell you a story... about a country whose people also bought into myths that an empire, with a completely unrelated ethnic and religious history, would improve their nation for free for them. They even joined that nations army, and fought and died, in far off lands like Sudan, to perish under the banner of Union Jack in a fight against Hitler in a war that had nothing to do with them... all because to be a commissioned British officer (though you could never sit with the white guy in the mess hall) was the supreme worldly gain. That nation also had its oligarchy with its Karzais and its Ghanis and Ameen Arsalas who wanted to preserve their feudalism... It was created in 1947 and its leaders have taken corruption to pinnacles unheard of before.

So in the end, you want to create a slave state next to another one. Ironic is it not?

5) Ask any and all subjugated people about what their outcome has been. Go to Tecumseh's grave and ask his spirit why he fought the Americans so ardently, to the death. I am sure it will point to the status of his destroyed Red Man brethren. Then take a look as Japan and the bases at Okinawa, and the destruction of a culture completely.

How were the resistence struggles, as bloody as they were, done by the Vietcong any different?

In fact, this reporting by the New York Times should strike an eerie chord and make you rethink which side of history you want to fall on."

[Catya Sher]

I don't like either of those, Michael S. or Ahmed Rashid.

I think we all have to wake up and not depend on
those analysts peddled to us by the American or other [European]
press.

One can't squash one's foot into a shoe which PARTIALLY fits.
One need the RIGHT shoe which fits 99% comfortably.
Or, the attempt is silly.

So with these American commentators.
Fareed Zakaria is a puppet of the New World Order; except for that one article he wrote 5 years ago countering all the prevailing attitudes about Iran
as some huge "threat" to America - what a joke ! -
he's a HACK of the system.

So are ALL these other people mentioned !

On the same note, I believe it's dangerous to get involved with which American politican
thinks what. Who cares, really?
The system is rigged and Truth is the biggest casualty.
So why participate in which newspaper thinks what.

Why are people here relying on the American media to shape their
views, even peripherally?

This is on the thread of Mullah Omar's message.
My feeling is to trust simple people like him, who are in the region.
Not well paid analysts who go on American TV
or do lecture tours.
All these are - to one degree or another - imposters.

I could imagine if you guys were not Pashtuns and Afghans.
But Pashtuns should be able to have a lazer-vision for who is
REAL and who is NOT REAL.

It seems to get lost when raised in America.
I see Ashraf and Qunduz as some of the few exceptions.
They seem to have their Pashtun instincts for reality intact.

Other people got too immersed in life here, which no offense,
is always a deadening affect.
There is abundant money, property, etc.
But the souls of the people are usually quite zombie-like.

Pashtuns and many Afghans who on the contrary stay there
keep their shrewdness about who is whom and what is what.

Here is an article which came out today. The author is recognized
for having written about Muslim women.
Yet what does she say?
Layer after layer of American Party Line.

I won't print it out, so I'll give the link and anyone can see what
kind of distortions are being foisted on those who
read the American media !

http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/...ad-on-Al-Qaeda

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I don't like either of those, Michael S. or Ahmed Rashid.

I think we all have to wake up and not depend on
those analysts peddled to us by the American or other [European]
press.

One can't squash one's foot into a shoe which PARTIALLY fits.
One need the RIGHT shoe which fits 99% comfortably.
Or, the attempt is silly.

So with these American commentators.
Fareed Zakaria is a puppet of the New World Order; except for that one article he wrote 5 years ago countering all the prevailing attitudes about Iran
as some huge "threat" to America - what a joke ! -
he's a HACK of the system.

So are ALL these other people mentioned !

On the same note, I believe it's dangerous to get involved with which American politican
thinks what. Who cares, really?
The system is rigged and Truth is the biggest casualty.
So why participate in which newspaper thinks what.

Why are people here relying on the American media to shape their
views, even peripherally?

This is on the thread of Mullah Omar's message.
My feeling is to trust simple people like him, who are in the region.
Not well paid analysts who go on American TV
or do lecture tours.
All these are - to one degree or another - imposters.

I could imagine if you guys were not Pashtuns and Afghans.
But Pashtuns should be able to have a lazer-vision for who is
REAL and who is NOT REAL.

It seems to get lost when raised in America.
I see Ashraf and Qunduz as some of the few exceptions.
They seem to have their Pashtun instincts for reality intact.

Other people got too immersed in life here, which no offense,
is always a deadening affect.
There is abundant money, property, etc.
But the souls of the people are usually quite zombie-like.

Pashtuns and many Afghans who on the contrary stay there
keep their shrewdness about who is whom and what is what.

Here is an article which came out today. The author is recognized
for having written about Muslim women.
Yet what does she say?
Layer after layer of American Party Line.

I won't print it out, so I'll give the link and anyone can see what
kind of distortions are being foisted on those who
read the American media !

http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/...ad-on-Al-Qaeda

You make certain valid points regarding indigenous populations speaking for themselves.

However, that is a recognized value.

A general approach that debators can take, which is what I am trying to do, is to say, OK, lets assume that Americans, being the dominant power, have some sort of monopoly on foreign affairs knowledge... lets assume that they are the world's supposed moral guiding light and the police man of the world... let us see what they say about the conflict in their own words.

The endorsement that Dr. Scheuer recieved from OBL should be enough to qualify him as a person that can at least step into the enemy's shoes and understand why that enemy is upset or driven enough to fight him.

The Americans are living under a false narrative, advanced by Pashtun nationalists (former Marxists) that these folks are fighting simply to take Britney Spears, and put a veil over her head.

I for one, think it is important to realize that when Central Intelligence's own analysts are advocating against intervention in the Muslim world, that ought to be trumpeted loudly.

[Catya Sher]

To continue,
the media here is NOT meant as
a source of INFORMATION
to enlighten American and world readers
so they can evaluate THEMSELVES and make
intelligent decisions about foreign or domestic policy topics.

It's a big SELL.
The media is MARKETING to you, the reader,
the Party Line of CFR / Bilderbergers, Zionists etc.
it's all one mishmash, but we know they are not
from the Light of God.

Rather they have a sinister agenda to
get you, the reader or viewer, in line with their
demonic policies [homosexuals considered OK
by decent society, homosexuals in US military approved,
abortion OK and not just OK but PUSHED on us
population control, all sort of evil programs.]

The way to stay pure and uninfluenced by this
onslaught is to realize that every time you read
a Huffington Post article almost [I take as exception
that one that the PF member H. wrote about the Fake
Aisha cover girl of Time ]
you are being forced to take in to your brainwaves
a lot of false information.

Better to stick to purer sources.

For example, Ashraf found a good Turkish article recently.
Press Tv is pretty good ;
RT is questionable but sometimes may help ;
Good sites like Veterans Today
and blogs along these lines...

it's not impossible.

It requires WORK.
Most of us are too lazy to branch out
and find these far more accurate sources of news
and analysis.

It's worth every moment to keep one's brain
FREE of all this trash which is, as I say, being
SOLD to those who are gullible enough
to believe that some part of some articles are true
so quote them and keep coming back for more info.

I believe it's dangerous, and eventually leads to
Alzheimer's or other forms of illness which show a CLOUDY BRAIN>

Most important thing should be keep one's brain crystal clear
in the Light of God.
Not to be able to chatter to Americans about who said this
and what is happening in the new elections.
Don't be seduced by being popular that way.
Better to be uninformed, "out of it" but
keep the SHARPEST possible mind.

Times may change and one will need to have THAT>
Not chitchat with co-workers about the chances
of so and so getting "elected". That's all a joke, anyway.

[Catya Sher]

About this purported endorsement of Michael S. by the supposed
terrorist leader - I highly question that.

Why? It doesn't ring true !

Perhaps a fake actor playing the role of this Osama MAY have said
something like that.
But let's be realistic.
If you are a terrorist leader on the run, you don't have time to
read over books about yourself, even assuming you are Mr Vanity
You have other considerations, namely survival.

A subordinate COULD read the book and make a report to his chief.

But I sort of doubt that.

First of all, i believe that he was already dead and there have been
doubles used in making all these tapes and videos.

So an Israeli agent may have a great joke in making such a solemn pronouncement.
But the real Osama ? I doubt that.