Barbelith Underground > Switchboard > NEWS: Kabul is being Bombed.

quote: by Frances And that's not to say that these attacks on Afghanistan can't be justified. I just wish, if they were, somebody would tell me why - with fact.

Nobody will ever be able to tell you that these attacks on Afghanistan are justified, because they are not. It seems so many people in the US and Europe are looking for reasons, that can justify these attacks. But think for one moment, why do we need reasons to justify these attacks? Could it be, because we all know, that these attacks are absolute wrong and we somehow deep down inside know, that we are being lied to, and that we can not and should not, trust a word our governments are telling us. Could it be, that we know this, but that we are afraid to say this out loud, for that is when we would have to take steps, to stop that what our governments have planned and are doing right now? Could it be, that we have no idea what to do then? Because admitting an mass, that we are being lied to, would demand action from us the people, in all these countries, who so eagerly are lining up behind Bush and Blair. It would mean, that we the people, would have to take things in our own hands , work together not only in the US but in the European countries as well, with the Islam communities to stop the coming mass murders, that the New World Order has planned for the Islam/Muslim world. Could it be , that we the people, have been following our ‘shepherds’ for such a long time, that we have gotten used to others telling us what to do and how to react, that we have forgotten how to take steps ourselves?

There is NO JUSTIFICATION, for attacking Afghanistan, and other Islam communities like in Indonesia and the Philippines. Bush said this yesterday, it was on Euro-News. Please people look at all the countries who share the Islam religion, these are the countries that they have planned to attack. There are raids, in many European countries, in the Islam communities, with the excuse that they were tipped about possible terrorists, or that the ways from the pilots are leading to these people. Its not about terrorism, its about erasing the Islam from our world, it’s the only religion that stands in the way of the new world order and their wishes for one world government, plain and simple. If it were not for the Islam, they would have succeeded with their plans, much earlier.

The ISLAM is the ONLY COMPETITOR of the RULING (white) Class. Christianity is not, the people don’t listen to the church anymore. In Islamic countries, the rules of the Koran, are more important than the rules of the government, thus competitive or even superior to the white ruler, and they don’t like that. So therefore, they NEED, to ERASE the ISLAM.

This, my dear Frances, is what they are fighting, Osama and Afghanistan are only a excuse, to start the last part of their completion plans. Nothing more than that. Your government is divided in 2 fronts, and one front is slowly waking up to the wrong doings of the other group, they, just like the US people, are discovering that they have been lied too. Just wait and see, you will have some names from your government, coming ‘soon’ in the news stating, that they are traitors and that they have been working from the inside helping Osama and the Islam terrorists. At that moment, you people in the US should realize, that you have people in the government, who can and will help you people, to fight your government. Don’t sit, but get up and form groups or join the existing groups, this way you will have a change of changing the events, from within the USA. Until then watch carefully what is happening in Europe, for change will come from within Europe.

Stop doubting yourself , you know exactly what’s going on, don’t look for excuses to justify what your governments is doing, for this question, from your side, shows that you know that there simply is no justification for killing innocent civilians, especially not women and little children. What your governments is doing , should be filed under the action cowardliness, they are shooting women, children and elderly, who are weakened already so much, straight in their back.
And you are asking for justification? Frances , I know, you know, better than that. Don’t feel guilty for what your government is doing, your government was never a government of the people nor for the people. It has always been about them, and never about the people. Bush was not elected by the people, just as the rest of your presidents , the votes have always been tampered with.

You belong to the people. There is a difference between you, who belongs to the people, and the government, who belongs to the industry. All the people, around our entire planet, have one enemy, the New World Order heads, meaning the governments, the church=Vatican/Talmud, and the club 1001, your ruling families under the wings of the royal families.

At this moment, the people are not aware, YET, about their own power, the moment the people group together in the USA and Europe and the Islam/Muslim world, we have a change of changing the events they have planned for us.

Because its not just erasing the Islam, no, its also getting rid of the flock that has started to cost them too much. We have been used as work slaves from the beginning of times. Its not just the blacks, the black slavery has been used, to dilute us the people, into thinking that we are free people, we never have been free people, we never had any rights nor protection, but we thought we had, mean while, we were just working for them and paying them for it, your taxes. The 3rd world was first used as breading grounds for cheap slaves, but they brutalized these people a bit to much and a bit to long, so in the end they could not use them anymore, freely. So somewere down the road, they, the ruling parties and industry ( it al started again, the use of slaves, but this time in a new form that would not be recognized as such, in 1694 when ‘The Bank of England’ was formed, but for real with the ‘Industrial Revolution’ that of course needless to say, started in England in 1820/1825) made deals with all these countries that they would leave these governments alone as long as they would be able to use their people as cheap labour , either in the own country or the countries of the ruling class. But Oh my, these slaves started to believe that they were free people as well, rising above their status of ‘slaves’ they started their own companies, got enough money to get good education for their children and they breaded and breaded more children than could be used as cheap labour.
Anyway, now we are at that point in history that ‘they’ the ruling families need to erase the bulk of these new ‘free slaves’, meaning you and I as well Frances, its not just about the ISLAM/MUSLIM COMMUNITY, BUT ABOUT US THE PEOPLE AS WELL!

Dont seek justification for violence, for there never is. Remember that there is a difference, between violence and punishment.
Violence hits innocent pople, and punishment only hits the ones, who deserves to be punished.
So yes, punish the ones who are responsible for the WTC and Pentagon attack, but dont use violence against innocent people, the people in Afghanistan and the rest of the Islam/Muslim.
Sincerely,

Frances Farmer

06:03 / 16.10.01

quote:
the way zerone wished the protestors well even after things had maybe gotten a little personal, frances' honesty - and all of us trying at least to make sense of this big nurderous mess instead of blanking it out or assuming what happens, happens.

Exactly the point. None of us agree entirely, but we all respect each other enough to listen. I thank you for listening to me, and I hope you know I'm listening to you.

quote:
it's not the people that are important - it's the dialogue.

let's keep picking over the points, and scrapping and being passionate about this - underneath, there's always tolerance. there's always respect.

Absolutely.

quote:
and now, i'll step aside for the topic to get back on track.

the next part of 'true dove' i want to put up/add will be called: 'no such thing as smart weapons' - and will focus on the pretty catastrophic discrepancy between the supposed pinpoint accuracy of the missiles, air strikes etc - and the often embarrassing failures (that tend not to go recorded).

I can't find this quote to pull out, but somebody earlier posted a quote discussing how as this war has no media-accessible frontline, we lose one of our greatest checks: Free press. If the press can only be informed by the government, and the government does not tell the press everything, the press is not free.

Naturally, there are secrets that ought to be kept -- not because it's ideal, but because in the world today, it may well be necessary. Most people don't want to know where the U.S.' ICBM silos are.

While there has been an official admittance from the U.S. government as to the latest errant munition, and the Taliban has been willing to escort the press about, it's still not a free press: We only see what the Taliban wants us to see. Which is then filtered by the U.S. government for national security, and then by the media for digestibility.

While people may not think this is a problem, it is. And this tight propaganda restriction is having an enormous effect: The vast majority of individuals I interact with on a day to day basis, while in some ways "awake" to what they see as "caveats" (collateral damage), are not willing to consider the possibility that this could be a wrong course of action.

Naturally, I have argued before and will again that calling it wrong; like some other anti-U.S. arguments, is arguing for the negative. There could be reasons. But, it does not follow to assume it's o.k. because it could be. Furthermore, things are currently occuring that are notok -- not if we're to continue our right to debate and discuss our opinions on this and topics like it.

That, I think, is the most practical first line of defense against this danger. Something is happening here -- something that's been hinted at for quite a while, but has not yet come to a crux. It is, quickly or slowly, coming to a crux. While there are potential futures in which this crux is not yet reached, I think societies move sporadically. I think almost everybody here has felt is coming -- and that's part of what has a whole lot of people here. There are tangible, real things in the world that aren't wokring out. Our society could very well be ill. I think this crux must be reached. As a growing pain. As a purging process. People need to wake the fuck up, and mother nature is going to do that, one way or another. It's just so many forces in the universe that we all know to exist, manifest right in front of our faces. Something is changing.

My personal push is that we need to focus on civil liberties. We do not have the data necessary to be valuable in working for peace in Afghanistan. But, perhaps, if we keep things from going out of hand in one respect, we'll be able to prevent them in an important one.

I guess what I'm saying, is, if we allow the U.S. and U.K. to become the veritable police state, this is going to happen again and again and again.

If we keep tempers and tensions low, perhaps disseminate the idea that "Hey, lots of people deal with this shit every day. Think about that." ... If we can do this, the pressure on the U.S. and U.K. governments will change.

Their goals will change. They have to. To an extent, the state must conform to the needs of the people.

Bush -- perhaps one of the most controversial U.S. Presidents of all time -- will not risk losing the approval rating he's got right now.

And if people support the U.S. bombing Iraq, well, that's what we need to look at. We need to explain that this will not solve the problem.

Public opinion matters.

We need to find a way to publically, convincingly, get this message out: Use your right to think, analyze, distinguish, and discuss -- use it or lose it.

And once people start doing that, they'll figure it out from there.

I hope.

Because we're not going to stop this war -- not even with 200,000 protestors storming the capital of god-knows-where, all of them, in unison, repeating the same completely coherent argument for peace.

Maybe we can shorten it, curb it, keep it from becoming utterly cancerous.

quote:
this seems to me to be one of the fundamental litmus tests to see beyond propaganda - divine the motives of the actor in terms of the action - not the words with which they explain or justify it.

While I agree with this to an enormous extent, I also see some fallacy in it: I think explanation and reason matters, to an extent -- but the Litmus test becomes mandatory in the event of continual divergence between speach and action.

Which means it should be continually applied to media and government, at large.

quote:
i can see how the US might make a case for bombing bases in the middle of the wilderness. i don't see how you can explode an 1,000lb warhead in a major city and not kill civilians. i mean - am i missing something?

It depends what's there.

I don't consider loss of civilian life acceptable, mind you: Just can't drop the point that we don't know. There are fringe circumstances.

I do have a healthy doubt, though.

quote:
i also think it's pretty awful to bomb a power station (one of two in the country) - thereby depriving (i'm guessing here, though i'll try and back it up) the hospitals, schools, houses etc of electricity.

Not particularly good, no. However, if that power plant was providing for anything of considerate air-defensive power, and Bush is trying to prevent large-scale loss of "our boys over there", we can certainly figure out how it happened.

And considering the U.S. and U.K. line indicates that this could last into next summer, we've got to note the fact the winter is going to hurt these people in a considerable capacity.

quote:
flip the script: this act is illegitimate:

While I do like this idea, I have some issues with it. Namely, we're not dealing with equivelent nations, circumstances, governments. But it does have perceptual value.

quote:
"the President of Afghanistan today confirmed he had 'opened a new frontier in the war against terrorism' by sending 50 cruise missiles into London. the english government is suspected of having links with the french terrorist thought to be responsible for the attack, though at this point we do not know where in this impoverished country he is. the english government had at first demanded they see evidence before handing him over - but more recently caved in to international pressure, and offered to hand him to an American court. the Arab allies rejected this offer, and refused any further talks. international charities have warned of a dire humanitarian crisis in england if help is not given soon, but the Afghan president has promised less than 20 civilians were killed in the blasts, which destroyed many of London's historic buildings and suspected centres of power."

There is a big rhetorical punch, although false, in the term "...promised less than 20 civilians were killed in the blasts..", as it was really a rather noncommital statement along the lines of "We've only been able to verify 20 civilian deaths at this point," (On the U.S. Pentagon's part).

Although in ways, I think the latter statement is pretty ludicrous. Might as well just say "Oops", and then keep your mouth shut until you know how badly you fucked up.

What would your suggestions be as to the direction in which action should be directed? How do you perceive the situation? How do you think we, as a civilian body, can best effect a humanitarian influence on this process, and also appease the ardent desire to feel safe that most feel right now?

Perhaps first we can ask some questions, such as:

Were the U.S. to cave to popular demand in the Middle-East (and parts of Central Asia) to desist in the support of the Isreali government and remove U.S. military forces from Saudi Arabia, what assurance, if any, would the citizens of the U.S. and U.S.-allied nations receive as to their safety?

Were the U.S. to step away from Afghanistan, having made some sort of politically correct retreat, such as "We think we've made our point, so we'll leave this war-torn nation alone," -- would that provide any more assurance?

Were the U.S. to wage war on Iraq - who has amassed chemical, biological, and possibly thermonuclear weapons unchecked by the U.N. for years now -- how serious would that be?

(I guess that was pretty rhetorical, because I think everyone would see that as somewhat serious.)

Where can go from here, and how do we get there?

[ 16-10-2001: Message edited by: Frances ]