That the world’s poorest country, in ruins after two decades of war, a four year long drought, nearly seven million people on the verge of starvation, unknown numbers of people dying from starvation, and half a million people maimed by war injuries, is about to be attacked by the world’s wealthiest countries with the world’s most powerful militaries, and the world’s most destructive weapons, is an obscenity. An evil nightmare. It reveals the sick and diseased nature not merely of amero-judaeo-brutish supremacism and global capitalism but of what is ridiculously called oomankind.[6] What have oomancruels come to when they find themselves in such a predicament?

This is the second mundi club publication on the middle east - the third covering middle east issues.[7] The perspective adopted in this work is global - although the planetary is not forgotten. It does not take the side of any country or creed. Its sympathies are with the downtrodden and dispossessed but It is concerned with justice and truth.[8] It attempts to praise where it is deserved and to condemn in proportion to the evil committed. This work has no interest in winning popularity amongst bipeds. If you think the world is in great shape then you’d be wasting your time reading any further.

A group of people hijack four aeroplanes and, fully laden with fuel and passengers, drive them into some of the biggest and most famous buildings around the world. These unique, extraordinary, and spectacular, atrocities indicate there is something terribly wrong with the way this world is being run: with the political system that condemns one set of terrorists as enemies and yet rewards other sets of terrorists as friends; with the economic system which gives to the rich and takes from the poor; and with the way that oomans are treating this planet, its Biodiversity, and its life support system. The profundity of the september 11th bombings reveals something profoundly disturbing about the world. The world’s ruling values of amero-judaeo-brutish supremacism, global capitalism, and anthropocentrism, have created this mess. Bin laden may have believed he was engaged in a glorious and sacred war against evil doers but what he has done is inadvertently to show up oomans’ suicidal capabilities.[9]

Allied propaganda is doing its best to dismiss the profound nature of this event by blaming it entirely on the hijackers’ evilness; by refusing to question why people are driven to commit such acts; by ignoring the support given to the bombers by people around the world. The profound nature of this event is also undermined if the only response is retaliatory action against the culprits ignoring the causes which drove these people to such extreme actions. The gravity of what has happened is so serious it is imperative to prevent the event from being undermined by secondary issues. The message could not be more clear - oomans are inflicting grievous damage on the world and on the Earth, and they are heading for oblivion. What further evidence do oomans around the world need not that global political, and economic, reforms are imperative but that oomans are incapable of bringing about these reforms and are simply driving themselves into oblivion? Is it conceivable that oomans need an even bigger, and more blatant, warning about the appalling state of the world before they try act to prevent their oblivion?

It could be argued he took this action to wake up the world to mass starvation in afghanistan. Whether he was justified or not depends entirely upon the so-called oomanity of the rich world. If western consumers knew about this starvation and were willing to provide relief supplies and help restore the country to a civilized state then he had no justification for his actions. If, on the other hand, they didn’t know about it and weren’t in the slightest bit interested in finding out about it, or, if they did know about it and weren’t in the slightest bit interested in doing anything about it, then he was fully justified. The people who are currently screaming that bin laden’s actions were unjustifiable ought to ask themselves what their views were on afghanistan prior to september 11th. Surely the lives of millions of afghanis are more important than those of a few thousand americans?

The likelihood is, however, that the world community, primarily america, would have prevented mass starvation in afghanistan. Many thousands of afghanis would have starved but eventually the world community would have acted. What’s more, bin laden did not commit this atrocity as a desperate publicity stunt to warn the world about afghanistan’s mass starvation. He has never mentioned the people starving in afghanistan.

If he committed this atrocity as a means of showing up the west’s appalling racist, tribal bigotry and the vile global inequalities of capitalism, then he has succeeded. But, in the end this doesn’t provide him with a justification because the september 11th bombings have also shown up the increasing spread of ooman sickness - moslem fundamentalism, zionist fundamentalism, christian fundamentalism, capitalist fundamentalism and, worst of all, ooman fundamentalism.[11]

So, is there any other justification that needs to be considered? It could be argued that if oomans carry on in the same way as they were prior to september 11th then he was justified. If they change dramatically and start to create a better world then he wasn’t. If the allies are more concerned with military action to combat (non-zionist) terrorists than transforming afghanistan into a decent country; bringing peace between zionists and palestinians - which at the very least includes a palestinian state; abolishing global poverty; and restoring the Earth’s life support system, then he was completely justified.[12] The world could not have continued in the same way as it was prior to september 11th because oomans were heading for oblivion. Polly toynbee stated that the consequence of any major change in the world would justify bin laden’s actions, “Only when the poorest country on earth succeeded in applying brute force did the world sit up and care about poverty. Only sheer terror brought the poor world from the do-gooding margins to the centre of politics. But that is an awkward fact no one mentions.”[13] But bin laden wasn’t intent on creating a better world for all people (let alone Animals or the Earth) so the justification for his actions would be the world’s failure to inaugurate fundamental reforms.

Firstly, mcblair has just implemented a policy necessitating the slaughter of 3.8 million Animals because of the spread of a common cold virus around the country’s quadruped livestock. It seems a little difficult going from being a mass murderer to a world saviour. The fact that he fails to appreciate that carnivorism is the cause of the world’s most fundamental problems is indicative as to how far removed from reality he is.[14] Secondly, mcblair has played this inspirational tune before. He did it when he became leader of the labour party and yet he fundamentally failed to fulfil these promises once he became prime minister. The public jubilation that greeted his first electoral landslide dissipated rapidly because his government became as mean, narrow-minded, hypocritical, and politically conventional, as the tories had been.[15] Even worse was that he seemed to use his labour conference speech to float himself into the clouds beyond his critics’ reach thereby avoiding serious political criticisms from party members for his many failures. Mcblair’s political cynicism pervades his administration, “Jo moore’s immediate reaction to the united states atrocities was to send this email to transport department press aides: “It’s now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury. Councillors’ expenses?”[16] And this is exactly what the labour government did until the e-mail was made public.[17]

Pretend you don’t know the right answer and ask yourself this question: when did blair make the following statement, “This is an extraordinary moment for progressive politics.”[18] Was it after his first landslide general election victory? After his second? Neither. It was his post september 11th labour party conference speech. One of the most remarkable facts about his premiership is that he has promised so much, and boosted the hopes of so many people, but failed to live up to the hype. He’s created more and more despondency by dumping one progressive issue after another. Given his track record so far, the prospects of him bringing about his global vision is dubious in the extreme.[19]

Attempts have been made to described the allies’ military action as a war between civilizations - the christian/secular world verses the islamic world. Other attempts describe it as a capitalist war - the world’s richest countries devastating the world’s poorest country.[20] A third description is a racist war: whites waging war against arabs and other races.

Whether it is seen as one or other of these three explanations it seems to be part of a conflict that sprawls from the west end of the mediterranean to the foothills of the western himalayas. The algerian military, with the aid of the cia, not merely prevented a moslem party from forming a government after winning the general election, it set about murdering the party’s activists. America has attacked libya and sudan. It supplies zionists in palestine with weapons to slaughter palestinians and to dominate the entire middle east region. For the last decade, america and brutland have been imposing sanctions on iraq. They have forced the turkish military to notify moslem parties in the country that, as in algeria, they will not be allowed to form a government even if they win a general election.[21]

None of these three explanations for the current conflict is adequate. The allies have no grand colonialist interest in conquering the moslem world - indeed they have helped to protect moslems in kosovo and macedonia. All of the allies are perfectly willing to co-exist with moderate, albeit dictatorial, moslem states. Both mcbush and mcblair have gone out of their way to stress their admiration for islamic culture and this work is not going to doubt their sincerity about this issue.

The conflict is far less grand than a conflict between civilizations or races.[22] It has much more limited objectives - although this could change if america decides to attack other countries. The americans have launched a war of retaliation against the perpetrators of the september 11th bombings. This war has the support of the jewish lobbies in america and brutland, and the zionists in palestine, who want retaliation for the damage done to the jewish owned twin towers, jewish interests, and jewish people.

The zionist state in palestine cannot survive without external financial and military support. It is partially propped up by the jewish diaspora - jewish businesses send huge amounts of financial support to the country e.g. robert maxwell. Much more importantly, jewish lobby groups in america and brutland are powerful enough to persuade these governments to protect and sustain the zionist state in palestine. The political power exerted by jews in america is intense. No candidate in an american presidential election could become president without the support of the jewish lobby. The american jewish lobby ensures the american government finances, arms, and protects the zionist state in palestine. The protection given to the zionists in palestine by successive american governments has enabled them to steal more and more land from the palestinians, build more and more illegal settlements, and to slaughter more and more palestinians.

The 1991 war against iraq was a proxy zionist war. The allies attacked iraq because if they didn’t then the zionist state in palestine would. After the war, iraq has been demilitarized and de-industrialized in order to protect the zionist state from further attacks.

The so-called ‘war on terrorism’ is american retaliation for the damage inflicted on america.[23] However, if the american military attacks other moslem countries in order to demilitarize, or de-industrialize, them, then this will have the benefit of achieving further protection for the zionist state in palestine. At this point the nature of the war will change from a war of retaliation to the second proxy zionist war. The proxy nature of this war will become more evident if the war against terrorism spreads beyond afghanistan to include the demilitarization of other moslem countries.

Given the power of the jewish lobby in the united states, the american government has little option but to protect the zionist state in palestine. Unfortunately, the more protection the zionists are given, the more provocative they become towards the palestinians, the more they try to extend their occupation of palestine, and the less likelihood there is of a peace agreement between the zionists and palestinians. Zionists such as ariel sharon have been deliberately pushing palestinians towards extremism because retaliation by palestinians enables him to justify further zionist expansion in palestine. The zionist-moslem conflict is going to get worse and worse until america and brutland force the zionists to accept the establishment of a palestinian state. This would prevent the radicalization of moderate moslem opinion and eventually allow moderate moslems to isolate and curb moslem fundamentalists. The problem is that over the last decade or so zionists have so inflamed moslems around the world that the point is soon going to be reached when there are too many fundamentalists to be contained and then a much larger scale conflict becomes a likelihood.

Whilst the allies are not fighting a war of civilizations, there is no doubt that bin laden is. He has been able to exploit all the grievances that america has generated amongst muslim people around the world - he is even winning support from all those independent people around the world who can see that the zionists in palestine have been treating palestinians atrociously - far worse than white south africans used to treat blacks.

As regards the question as to whether this work supports the arrest of osama bin laden and the consequent military action in afghanistan. There is only one just, non-racist, answer: only if efforts are made to arrest ariel sharon for his war crimes. To most western people the idea of arresting that loveable teddy bear ariel sharon is incomprehensible. This incomprehension explains why this second proxy zionist war is feasible and why americans are perceived to be such racists.

Given oomans’ anthropocentrism - the belief that they can do anything they want to the Earth, and given the damage they are inflicting on the Earth, then it has to be said ‘thank goodness the twin towers have gone’. These buildings were obscene ecological monstrosities. They were like oomans putting two fingers up to the Earth’s life support system. There was no possible ecological justification for these towers. They epitomized ooman domination over the Earth rather than oomans’ respect for the Earth. So, once again, thank goodness they’re gone. It would have been better if oomans came to the realization that these towers were a product of oomans’ grandiose dominance of the Earth and thus needed to be pulled down for the sake of living in peace with the Earth. It would have been better morally if no oomans were in the buildings before they were demolished. But, at the end of the day the Earth is better off without them.

Despite being warned 17 years before the event that such a disaster was militarily feasible the american military failed to avert the disaster. They didn’t even defend themselves against the possibility of such an attack. The parallel with the september 11th bombings is not the gross failure of the cia and the rest of america’s security services to prevent the attack - about which they were completely outwitted. Nor is the parallel with the failure of the american air force to block or even shoot down any of the hijacked planes - it was 40 minutes between the time the first plane crashed into the world trade centre and the third one crashed into the pentagon.[26] Nor is it that the american military no more wants to put bin laden on trial than it wanted to court martial this officer.

What is important about this story is that the american military were so bloody mindedly arrogant they would not listen to reasonable warnings. They were so unwilling to countenance rationality as to be irrational. The commonly held view of the significance of pearl harbour is that even the best prepared and most powerful military machines can be caught unawares if their enemies are prepared to be ruthless and audacious enough. But it seems this event should be reinterpreted as an example of military vulnerability and inertia brought about by gross institutional arrogance, stupidity, intransigence, and, it has to be suspected, tinged with a supremacist belief in america’s military invincibility. It is a character flaw found in recent american history - american politicians’ ability to simply deny reality, to turn their backs on the crimes they’ve committed, and their unwillingness to learn from their crimes which leads them to repeating the same mistakes over and over again.[27]

It is well documented that since the second world war, america has financed and armed some of the world’s most despotic governments which have used these resources to slaughter millions of people. It would be all too easy to construct a case suggesting that american governments have been the world’s worst terrorists. As john pilger states, “An American letter writer to the Guardian last week, in admonishing the writer Arundhati Roy for producing a "laundry list" of American terror around the world, revealed how the blinkered think. The lives of millions of people extinguished as a consequence of American policies, be they Iraqis or Palestinians, Timorese or Congolese, belong not in our living memory, but on a "list". Apply that dismissive abstraction to the Holocaust, and imagine the profanity."[28]

The paradox of american politics is that whilst americans enjoy the greatest political and economic freedoms, american governments have propped up many despotic regimes around the world - some appallingly so. The american political structure is founded on the world’s greatest constitution. This constitution is the greatest guarantee of domestic freedom. It is the greatest beacon of light for political freedoms around the world. If this beacon of light was to go out, the whole world would be plunged into darkness - megalomaniac dictators would take their chance to carry out acts of violence they know they can never get away with because of america’s the political freedoms. But, beyond the country’s shores the american government has not sought to establish conditions where other peoples can enjoy this light but, on the contrary, has created deserts of darkness.[29] It is as if american politicians, burdened by the constraints imposed upon them at home by their constitution, only felt free to indulge their dictatorial traits in the outside world. This has led them to committing some appalling barbarities - supporting pol pot in cambodia being the lowest point in this history.

The purpose of this work is not to mount a denunciation of american terrorism but to point out the consequences of this terrorism for the country itself - what hannah arendt once called the boomerang effect on countries embarking upon imperialist adventures. There is a huge amount of muddy water sloshing around the cesspit of oomanity and although americans might be tempted to believe they have just been soaked by a freak wave perhaps they ought to take the time to appreciate just how fast the water is swirling around so they don’t end up drowning in the shit they’ve dumped around the world over the last couple of decades. Because if americans’ sole motive in their so-called ‘war against terrorism’ is revenge there are millions of people around the world who have scores to settle with america - if only they could get within range. Since 1979, american governments have had some extraordinary bad luck with their terrorist allies. The problems that american governments have generated for themselves is that they’ve supported terrorism, then walked away from their crimes as if they haven’t had anything to do with them, only to find themselves facing the terrorists they’ve just funded and armed. Americans not merely pretend they’ve never done anything wrong, they almost seem as if they’ve forgotten what they’ve done. They make themselves innocent or forgetful of their crimes and experience shock and bewilderment when ‘terrorists’ retaliate for such crimes. The problem for america is that the victims of american terrorism don’t forget.

Mcblair dismisses such criticism of american foreign policy, “I think of all this and I reflect: yes, America has its faults, but it is a free country, a democracy, it is our ally and some of the reaction to September 11 betrays a hatred of America that shames those that feel it.”[30] He adopts this stance not because he’s a great historian, nor merely because he’s trying to protect a friend but because brutland has often stood alongside america when many of these crimes were committed - and he too has got to take a share of the blame for the deaths of up to a million children in iraq.

Given the anger of the iranian people towards america, the taking of american hostages was a relatively moderate retaliation - it was far less uncivilized than the retaliation taken by some revolutionaries after decades of oppression. Surely this should have been the end of the matter? Surely, the americans should have thought ‘We did some pretty nasty things in iran which caused people to hate us. We’ve had our wrists smacked so let’s call it quits. Let’s get on with the business of enjoying and honouring this beautiful planet.’ Unfortunately the new american president, a nasty, vacuous, extreme right wing, supremacist, moron saw the world as a provider of resources for american consumers and as a training ground for demonstrations of american military supremacy. Americans loved strutting around as the world’s greatest superpower and they weren’t willing to give up indulging in their supremacist feelings. They took their revenge by funding and arming saddam hussein who embarked on a war with iran in which roughly a million people died. It has to be suspected that this mass slaughter was a totally disproportionate punishment for iran’s taking of american hostages. How could this vile mass slaughter in any way be deemed a justifiable retaliation for hostage taking which did not result in the loss of american lives?[32] But america wasn’t interested in wallowing in any guilt about what they’d done in iran - it just turned its back on the country and forgot all about it. Even today the american government continues to define iran as a state which promotes terrorism. This ban would doubtlessly have remained in place for decades to come even if iran had nothing to do with terrorism.

America’s response was their putrid BOG campaign (boycott of the olympic games) which gave cold war warriors the chance to spew out, once again, their domino theory of world domination that had driven america into vietnam two decades earlier. But america also responded by financing, arming, and training, what it called afghanistan’s mujahedeen freedom fighters. According to john simpson, “The united states armed them and trained them with the active assistance of the pakistan government.”[34] The americans were so determined to bog the russians down in afghanistan that they armed only the most radical and the most militant of the mujahedeen factions, “Ironically the americans showed a preference for the more extreme islamists because they thought they were the fiercest fighters.”[35] The americans regarded bin laden as a useful ally, a freedom fighter. They even supplied him with the critical weapons which enabled the mujahedeen to drive the russians out of the country, “Ironically in the final years of the war, bin laden was a cia ally - part of a secret pipeline that funnelled more than £300 million worth of arms a year to the afghan resistance. .. bin laden and his 3,000 strong army of volunteers were distributing the latest anti-aircraft stinger missiles to the rebels. Those arms turned the war in the afghans favour - with more than 270 soviet aircraft shot down.”[36] In 1989, after a decade of terrible bloodbaths, the mujahedeen finally expelled the russians - neither the bloodbaths nor the expulsion would have happened without america supplying the mujahedeen with weapons, “More than a million afghans were killed (during the russian invasion).”[37]

The russians might have been driven out of afghanistan by the mujahedeen but they left a secular government in charge of the country. The mujahedeen continued to wage war on this new afghanistani government which had control only over the cities, towns and roads. The americans were determined to rid the country of even these latest vestiges of russian patronage and continued to finance and arm the most militant mujahedeen factions, “Yet the cia, heavily influenced by the pakistani intelligence services, still went on backing some mujahedeen groups, usually the more islamic ones. The money was less than it had been but it still bought an almost limitless amount of firepower.”[38] Peter tomsen, the united states’ special envoy to the mujahedeen stated that the u.s. would continue to fund and arm the mujahedeen until it toppled the current government, “Our assistance will continue as long as it is necessary for this process to play itself out.”[39]

It took the mujahedeen fighters three years to topple the kabul government and take control of afghanistan. The damage done to the capital and other towns across afghanistan was considerable, “The capital which had escaped serious damage during the war against the soviet invaders was left in ruins and 50,000 people nearly all civilians, were killed.”[40]

What followed was not peace but an entirely predictable factional war in which the various mujahedeen groups that had been fighting the secular government turned against each other in a fight for territory and power, “More than a million afghans were killed (during the russian invasion). But the country’s real nightmare (after the russians pulled out) was just beginning. The seven different mujahedeen factions which made up the afghan resistance immediately fell out over who would share the spoils of war.”[41] The mujahedeen regime misruled for three years during which time, “Corruption had flourished under the mujahedeen.”[42]

The americans couldn’t possibly have failed to predict what would happen after the collapse of the secular government. But, having used the mujahedeen freedom fighters to expel the russians and overthrow a secular government, the americans then promptly left and turned their backs on the country. They did nothing to try and bring peace and stability. Such was america’s contempt for the afghani people that as soon as the mujahedeen ‘freedom fighters’ carried out their contract killing of russian soldiers and eradicated russian influence, the americans went home to watch television and revel in their global supremacy. This was a pretty dumb thing to do when america’s ‘freedom fighters’ still had many american weapons at their disposal. The american government totally wrecked afghanistan because of its superpower rivalry with russia and its paranoiac adherence to the domino theory of world domination - just as it had wrecked vietnam. Indeed, it could be argued that the war in afghanistan was almost like a second vietnam war. The americans then turned their back on this national wreckage, and on september 11th acted in a horrified manner when some of this wreckage turned up on their back doorstep - get real! The american government deserved what it got - even if american citizens did not. It would be entirely wrong to say that the american government got what it deserved.

It was only with the sudden emergence of the taliban as a military force and their rapid overpowering of war exhausted afghani factions that afghanistan was once again unified - except for the northern provinces. Mohammed omar was a highly devout, local, religious leader. He was not a warlord but in 1994 he responded angrily to a crime committed by some mujahedeen fighters and students began to gravitate towards him. The afghani word taliban means ‘student’ and this is literally what this new military force was - a group of students from pakistan’s religious schools who, with virtually no military training, were inspired by omar to take up arms. The taliban started off as little more than a gang of schoolboys between the ages of 14 and 24, “Within days, omar was leading a movement that would, in two years, control more than 90% of the country and finally end the civil war.”[43]

By the time the taliban gained control of the country there was no electricity supply, no gas supply, no telephone service, no postal service, no water supply, no roads, no medical clinics. John simpson suggests that the mujahedeen .. “had shelled the spoils of their victory.”[44] Most of the buildings in the country had been damaged to one extent or another, “There is nothing to bomb in afghanistan that has not already been destroyed in more than two decades of war. The country is a ruin .. For the past four years afghanistan has suffered a crippling drought that has brought millions to the brink of starvation.”[45]; “It was a long, bitter war of attrition against the red army that destroyed most of afghanistan, turned millions into refugees and produced thousands of “martyrs to allah”. The war against the russians, the civil war, and then the factional mujahedeen fighting had reduced the country to a wasteland. There are no roads, no medical clinics, no electricity, no clean water supply and no hope of progress.”[46] Afghanistan was more than an archetypal example of a disintegrating nation - it was a nation that had disintegrated, “Afghanistan is scarcely a country anymore.”[47]

Out of the country’s chaos and disintegration, the taliban’s devout, and ultra conservative, leaders began to establish a severe islamic state. This meant brutal punishments involving whippings, amputations, and public executions, and also the complete abolition of women’s rights, etc. It was a state so severe that it drove many to flee the country.

The regime gave refuge to bin laden. Having endured nearly two decades of bloodshed what did they care if he wanted to launch attacks on america. How could these local religious leaders suspect that bin laden could reach around the other side of the world? What choice did they have? He was the only person willing to finance the regime since america had so contemptuously and, as it turned out, so fatally, turned its back on the country.

Western commentators have recently indulged in the tribalistic rewriting of afghanistani history. Prior to september 11th the taliban were praised for ending the civil war and bringing order to the country. It was reported that travellers and business people admired the taliban for ending highway banditry and the ‘wild east’ kalashnikov culture that had pervaded the country for many years.

After the september 11th bombings, western livestock hacks started blaming the taliban for all the country’s terrible woes that had built up over the previous twenty years. Mark dowdney argued, “The taliban’s six year reign in power has brought a nation already one of the world’s poorest to its knees. Life expectancy is only 43 years, women cannot work or be educated, and half the population is starving.”[48] Kevin toolis stated, “The russians fled only to be succeeded by the hardline islamic fundamentalist taliban movement who have banned music, dentistry, photography - and barred women from leaving their homes as part of their warped interpretation of the muslim holy book, the koran.”[49] Gary jones followed exactly the same line, “Many thought the taliban would be their saviour following years of infighting between warlords who thought nothing of massacring men, women, and children. Certainly the lawlessness ended when the taliban took control .. They crushed corruption, restored peace, and allowed businesses to flourish. Then the terror began.”[50]

John simpson talked of the taliban wanting to restart history, “It was the start of year zero. They wanted to stop the clock of history and restart it at a different and earlier time.”[51] He mentioned the “killing fields”.[52] In the past both phrases had become key descriptions of pol pot’s totalitarian regime in cambodia.[53] It is inaccurate and disgraceful to describe the taliban in the same way.[54] It appears that the taliban did carry out some slaughters but whether this was the result of orders from taliban leaders is not known. The slaughters were in the same league as those carried out by fascists such as mussolini, franco, or pinochet. They were nothing like the totalitarian mass murders such as those carried out by hitler or stalin when millions were killed. Simpson suggests the taliban were terrorizing afghan people, “Executions in public are meant to scare the population into obedience.”[55] He suggests there was widespread terror in the country, “I paid my longest visit to afghanistan in 1999 and i found the same thing everywhere. The degree to which the taliban regime was hated and feared was absolutely unmistakable.”[56] He showed grim film footage of an execution of a woman in a football stadium as if this is proof of the taliban’s totalitarianism. But the woman was executed for killing her husband. In other words, she was being punished for a specific crime. If the taliban was a totalitarian government it wouldn’t just be executing one person but hundreds, thousands at a time. And they would have been killed not because they had committed a specific crime but because they were an ideologically determined enemy.

It ought to be remembered that the taliban ‘army’ was composed firstly, of illiterate schoolboys many of whom were orphans. These kids probably never had anyone, let alone, parents to help them to grow up. And yet they were expected to rule the country with the wisdom of solomon - a task which was made even more difficult when they were having to face attacks from pockets of armed bandits. The taliban also consisted of thousands of missionary moslems from around the world who wanted to help create a true moslem state and whose religious zeal may have got the better of them, “His testimony confirmed other accounts that the Taliban's most brutal killers have often been Pakistani Islamic extremists and Arabs loyal to Osama Bin Laden. They fight in a unit commanded by Mullah Dadullah, a senior Taliban field commander.”[57]

It is laughable listening to western commentators applying their western values to afghanistan, when it would have been difficult for any leadership to ensure discipline amongst child soldiers and multi-ethnic missionaries and to establish order out of the chaos and ruins of a blood drenched country.

Western journalist hacks have even denounced the regime for banning television, “They even banned television, music and the cinema.”[58] Even mcblair complained about this gross infringement of ooman rights, “There is no sport allowed, or television or photography.”[59] This is pretty absurd when the country doesn’t produce its own electricity - most of its electricity is imported from pakistan. Do they really believe the taliban have been standing outside mega shopping malls preventing afghanis from buying the latest digital television sets from curry’s or wal-mart? Even if there was electricity and even if people had television sets what sort of discipline would taliban leaders be able to impose on their teenage soldiers and civilians if they were allowed to watch junk like coronation street, brookside, emmerdale farm? And how exactly is it possible to carry out dentistry without electricity? The only reason the country has a telephone service is because it, too, like the electricity system, is run from pakistan. Even peter hain joined in this tribal chorus against the taliban calling it, “One of the most odious regimes in the world.”[60] This is blatant propaganda since this title is currently held by the zionist state in palestine because of its abhorrent apartheid regime. Zionists in palestine have murdered far more people than the taliban - although, to be fair, it executes people swiftly these days since it has, temporarily, given up torturing palestinians.

The talibans were once praised for trying to tackling the country’s heroin trade but since september 11th western livestock journalists have been condemning them for being the country’s biggest drugs dealers. They’ve even accused osama bid laden of heading the afghanistan heroin connection - see below.[61]

The taliban seem to have been trying to run the country as if it were a big, open air, monastery. However, creating a nationwide monastery could be seen as an achievement given the country’s stone age conditions, all pervasive illiteracy, teenage soldiers, and the prevalence of war-madness amongst a people battered by over two decades of war. From the perspective of what happened in cambodia where similar conditions produced pol pot and the kymer rouge, the taliban have been a success in avoiding such depths. Western consumers, hacks, and politicians, provide an excellent example of ooman vileness when they sit in their armchairs denouncing the barbarities of people who have suffered two decades of wars - especially when these livestock have done absolutely nothing to help such people to recover from their traumas. The allies talk about “ground zero” in new york - what they seem to forget is that much of afghanistan has been at “ground zero” since 1980 when america played out its insane super-power battle in the country and then went home. The economist cuts through the western world’s moral canker. America had triggered off a jihad in afghanistan, "The notion of jihad, or holy war, had almost ceased to exist in the Muslim world after the tenth century until it was revived, with American encouragement, to fire an international, pan-Islamic movement after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979."[62] The american government got the jihad it deserved.

After the war, iraq was in a desperate financial state. Saddam regarded kuwait as a reward for his faithful service in america’s proxy war with iran. He massed troops on the border with kuwait and waited several weeks to gauge the american government’s opinion. The american government remained indifferent to the prospect of an invasion. Saddam took this to mean that america would condone the invasion. Unfortunately for him, the brutish and the zionist governments complained about the invasion. The israelis threatened to attack iraq for invading kuwait. The american government suddenly changed its mind and this put saddam in no man’s land. In 1991, the allies waged war on iraq as a proxy war for israel.

Since the end of the gulf war the allies have continued to bomb iraq. It has imposed sanctions on the country. Hundreds of thousands of iraqi children have died from starvation, disease, or radiation poisoning from american munitions. The united nations estimates between half a million and a million have died. The sanctions have made the country one of the poorest in the world. Iraq is unable to provide enough food for its people. The country’s poverty has meant that it has not been able to retain doctors to treat the victims of war let alone provide the medical facilities such victims needed. It has not been allowed access to the medicines needed to relieve their pain. America and brutland have committed mass murder in iraq. The following is an extensive quote from david edwards about this truly appalling condition which is known to only a handful of people in the so-called civilized world, “In September 1998, Denis Halliday, the UN Assistant Secretary-General, resigned after 34 years with the UN, declaring the US and British sanctions regime imposed on Iraq "genocidal". Halliday, who ran the UN’s "oil for food" programme in Iraq, continues to openly place blame for the excess deaths of 600,000 Iraqi children under five, as reported by the United Nations Children’s Fund, squarely on the shoulders of the US and British governments. In February 2000, Halliday’s successor as UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq, Hans von Sponeck, also resigned after 30 years with the UN, asking, "How long should the civilian population of Iraq be exposed to such punishment for something they have never done?" Two days later, Jutta Burghardt, head of the World Food Programme in Iraq, resigned, saying privately that what was being done to the people of Iraq was intolerable. Halliday and von Sponeck have both dismissed British and US government claims that the Iraqi government is withholding medicine and food, that it is exploiting the suffering of its people for propaganda purposes. Halliday has said: "In my mind I have no doubt in saying that there is not one person in the Ministry of Health or anywhere else in the Iraqi government who is deliberately trying to damage the health, or allowing children or others to die by deliberately not distributing medical supplies. That’s just nonsense." In an interview in May 2000, Halliday told me: "Washington, and to a lesser extent London, have deliberately played games through the Sanctions Committee with this programme for years ­ it’s a deliberate ploy. For the British Government to say that the quantities [of drugs] involved for vaccinating kids are going to produce weapons of mass destruction, this is just nonsense. That’s why I’ve been using the word genocide, because this is a deliberate policy to destroy the people of Iraq. I’m afraid I have no other view at this late stage." On recent talk of "smart sanctions", von Sponeck has this to say: "Fundamentally, to me, it is really tinkering at the edges of a sanctions regime and that isn’t at all what Iraq and the civilian population need. What they need is a lifting, a full lifting [of the sanctions], and nothing else." Halliday and von Sponeck are credible, authoritative voices. What they describe, in my view, belongs in the same category as the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis against the Jews. After all, did the Nazis kill many more than 600,000 Jewish children under five? Halliday and von Sponeck have been all but blanked by the British and US media; they are non-people. Whereas claims of atrocities by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, by Iraq in Kuwait, and by Serbia in Kosovo, received massive coverage throughout the media, our responsibility for comparable suffering in Iraq has been the subject of no such campaign. Instead, there have been sporadic articles, mostly repeating the favoured government line: Saddam is to blame.”[63]

Edwards also provides evidence about what is happening in iraq from an “ordinary” housewife, “While the media indulged itself in the Big Brother spectacle in August 2000, Joanne Baker, a Bristol housewife, visited Iraq. This is what she found: "There are terrible problems with birth defects and leukaemia, which have been linked to the use of around 350 tons of depleted uranium munitions during the war. They don’t have enough drugs for chemotherapy. They don’t have enough blood, enough oxygen, or anaesthetics. Women are having caesarean operations without anaesthetics; it’s just horrendous. There are no proper pain killers." Unsurprisingly, during the general election, there was literally no mention made of any of this by any of the political parties or the mass media ­ Iraq was ignored as a non-issue. The fact that senior UN diplomats had resigned in 1998 and 2000 declaring Tony Blair’s government guilty of genocide, was deemed irrelevant in judging its performance since 1997.”[64]

Norman g finkelstein pulls no punches about this slaughter, “As in the nazi holocaust, a million children have likely perished. Questioned on national television about the grisly death toll in iraq, secretary of state madeleine albright replied that “the price is worth it”.[65]

Neither the american, nor the brutish, governments have been interested in this humanitarian suffering. The evil committed by saddam hussein pales into comparison with that carried out by the great satanists. The only reason that american and brutish governments can get away with blaming this humanitarian disaster on saddam is because their livestock consumers know nothing about what is going on, and care even less, so they simply take the word of their governments about who is to blame. The american and brutish governments have domesticated their consumers into livestock who have no other care in the world than grazing and who can be led around by their noses as long as they’re provided with plenty of fresh hay. The reason the americans and brutish are imposing sanctions on iraq and driving afghanistan into the stone age is to protect the zionists in israel. The zionist-dominated american government protects israel no matter what the cost to iraq or to the moslem world or even american consumers. It has to be asked, just how much suffering is the west going to inflict on the world’s 1.2 billion moslems for the sake of protecting a few million jews who want to re-enact the ramblings of their old testament leaders?

The americans have done nothing to try and clean up agent orange which they sprayed over large parts of the country and which has led not merely to thousands of women giving birth to children with birth defects but to third generation women giving birth to children with birth defects, “To thanh nam .. was born in june 1997 in the village of nguyen khe near hanoi in vietnam. Doctors believe he is one of a small but growing number of vietnamese children who are third generation victims of the toxic pesticides - in particular agent orange - that were sprayed over the country by the u.s air force at the height of the vietnam war thirty years ago. Agent Orange is a mixture of the herbicides 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T. Both chemicals mimic plant hormones and upset the metabolism of growing plants. Concern about the formulation centred largely on the presence of dioxin or 2,3,7,8-TCDD, an unwanted by-product in the manufacture of 2,4,5-T and one of the most poisonous substances known to science. The chemicals used to make agent orange were widely used on farms and in gardens in the u.s. and europe in the 1960s. But the concentrations used in vietnam, at time 40 litres per hectare, were 20-100 times those employed in normal agriculture. American military aircraft sprayed some 50 million litres of agent orange over the country between 1962 and 1971 in a project known as operation ranch hand, which at its peak in 1969 employed 25 aircraft. They doused 1.7 million hectares, often several times over. By the end of the war, a fifth of south vietnam’s forests had been sprayed with agent orange, and more than a third of its mangrove forests were dead. The defoliation was on an unprecedented scale, far exceeding british spraying of jungles during counter-insurgency operations against communists in malaysia in the 1950s. Nature has cleansed vietnamese soils and vegetation of most of the dioxin. But adult humans still harbour higher levels in blood, fat and breast milk.”[67]

As if this wasn’t punishment enough for the vietnamese trying to defend their country from these satanists, american governments also imposed financial sanctions forcing the country to stew in its war ravaged state. Good old american livestock consumers promptly forgot about what the american military did to this poor country and its people and forgot about america’s war crimes. There have been no interviews on american television of vietnamese parents grieving over the loss of their children to american landmines or american induced birth defects. The appalling environmental damage that america caused as a result of prosecuting this stupid, fucking, shitty, shameful, odious war should also not be forgotten. If the vietnamese had happened to have been responsible for the september 11th bombings then i’d say “Well done, you were completely justified in your actions, you’ve done a damn fine job.” - but of course the vietnamese are much too civilized and sophisticated to do anything as dastardly as the americans.

And then, horror piled upon horror. In 1975 pol pot and the kymer rouge overthrew the american backed government in cambodia. It entered the capital, Phnom phen, and forced all of its inhabitants to leave and resettled them in villages around the country - two million people were forced out of the capital in just 72 hours. It then carried out a mass slaughter of its own citizens that was so extensive it hadn’t been seen since the days of hitler and stalin. It is believed that during his four year reign in power nearly 2 million people were clubbed together. The khymer rouge had an enormous enmity towards foreigners especially the vietnamese any vietnamese found living in kampuchea were exterminated, “There is no record of any vietnamese surviving pol pot’s regime.” The kymer rouge believed it was not possible to co-exist with the vietnamese and started launching small scale attacks on vietnam as a prelude to a genocidal war, “His (pol pot’s) psychotic and life long hatred for the vietnamese would be his undoing. In response to continuous raids into vietnamese territory, on december 21st 1977, 150,000 vietnamese troops stormed across the cambodian border. By january 6th 1978 they were on the outskirts of Phnom phen, “Pol pot and thousands of his khymer rouge henchmen fled Phnom phen to northern cambodia and thailand. From here pol pot continued a guerrilla war against the new vietnamese government. It would be another 20 years before he was seen again.” That is when he was put on trial. He died naturally in 1998. It is believed that during his four year reign he may have killed up to 2 million people - nearly a third of the cambodian people.[68]

The vietnamese government was appalled by pol pot’s slaughter of vietnamese in cambodia and by the constant invasions of vietnam by kymer rouge troops. It may also have been horrified by the slaughters going on in the country. In the end it invaded cambodia an ended this appalling abomination. They were completely justified in their actions. So, how did the american government react to the invasion and the termination of the cambodian government’s mass slaughter which, if left to itself, might have swallowed not two million but three, four, or five, million cambodians? It took umbrage!!!! Yes indeed, the american government, along with its puppet brutish government, was one of the most strident defenders of pol pot and his kymer rouge. This is the reason the vietnamese were never able to defeat the kymer rouge and arrest pol pot.

Incidentally, one of the main reasons that pol pot was able to oust the american backed cambodian government was because americans had been carpet bombing cambodia in an attempt to prevent the north vietnamese from using the country to launch attacks on americans in vietnam. Cambodians were not great supporters of their own government when it allowed the americans, sorry, the satanists, to bomb the country killing thousands of innocent people. This was nixon’s secret war. Thousands of cambodian peasants were killed by this carpet bombing. Americans didn’t care a hoot about the loss of these innocent lives. The americans killed the cambodians indiscriminately, as if they didn’t matter, just in the hope that some of the bombs that rained down upon the country would end up killing vietnamese troops.

It has to be asked how many american livestock consumers remember their government supporting pol pot? When i hear people praising american foreign policy i really wonder at the depths of their inhumanity. America has never apologized for what it did in vietnam or cambodia and until they do they’ll always have the guilt of it hanging over them even though, like a halo, they’re unaware of it.

American governments financed a terrible war in afghanistan and then, after the russians were driven out, promptly dumped the country and allowed it to descend into a civil war. Americans just turned their backs on the country - which is why, of course, they never noticed the anger welling up in their former allies such as bin laden. If you stir up a hornets’ nest don’t be surprised if you end up getting bitten.

It ought to be mentioned that during the mujahedeen war against the russians, the americans also supplied huge amounts of resources to the pakistani government to help oust the russians. The pakistanis had been a critical ally in driving the russians out of afghanistan. However, as soon as the war was over the americans turned their backs on the pakistani government. This created a resentment amongst pakistanis which has frequently resurfaced since the september 11th bombings when america began to court the pakistani government for assistance.[69]

And the americans have also turned their backs on iraq. True they imposed sanctions on iraq; they paid a great deal of attention to demilitarizing the country leaving it vulnerable to attack from any of its enemies; and they have continually bombed the country to try and destabilize the regime but they have paid no attention to the country’s social and humanitarian problems. The american government, and the american people, imposed sanctions and then simply turned their back on this mass terrorism. Once again, no american film crews have been holding interviews with iraqi parents grieving over the loss of their loved ones - people who were no less loved than any of those who died in the american bombings. And they’re still dying today as nasty, right wing, loony american politicians lobby the president to extend the war beyond afghanistan to iraq. What a sight this will be. After the american and brutish armies bomb, and then trample over, the starving, destitute people of afghanistan, american and british soldiers will be in a better psychological condition for the march through the graveyards of iraq.

America has imposed sanctions on cuba for decades not because it is responsible for acts of global terrorism but because it’s popular leader wasn’t the right flavour for the extreme right wing, freedom loving (especially guns), ideologically insane, crackpots in the american government. The cuban lobby prevents american presidents from lifting sanctions against cuba just as the jewish lobby prevents american presidents from doing anything which harms zionists’ interests in palestine.

Successive american governments have financed and armed terrorists around the world leaving millions dead, maimed, traumatized, poisoned, deformed, diseased, tortured or, at best, bankrupt. They then leave these countries to stew in the political disorder, economic chaos, and social deprivation, they have created. America’s wonderful, muscle-bound, cowboys fuck off back to their decadent consumer paradise and settle down to the mindless escapism provided by its entertainment industry where livestock aren’t confronted by any of the disasters they’ve left behind them. It’s interesting that america’s entertainment industry is dominated by jews who exclude moslems/arabs from stardom - unless of course they’re gun-tottin terrorists. Surprise, surprise. Americans have seen the cardboard cut-out moslem terrorists on their cinema and television screens but those in real life weren’t anything like as dumb and incompetent as those portrayed by zionist hollywood film and television directors - hey welcome to the real world beyond your bigotry.

Since the rise of the extreme, right wing, free market, corporate, loony, political leaders in both america and brutland, (thatcher and reagan), the american governments’ financing of terrorism in the middle east has caused widespread suffering amongst moslem people and has also resulted in considerable suffering for the american people. American governments brought this suffering on their own people as a result of their gross irresponsibility in financing and arming terrorism then turning their backs on what these terrorists got up to, “No, Israel is not to blame for what happened last week. The culprits were Arabs, not Israelis. But America's failure to act with honour in the Middle East, its promiscuous sale of missiles to those who use them against civilians, its blithe disregard for the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi children under sanctions of which Washington is the principal supporter ­ all these are intimately related to the society that produced the Arabs who plunged America into an apocalypse of fire last week.”[70]

A related question which has to be asked is, ‘Why is america so reluctant to bring the benefits of its greatest asset, its constitution, to the rest of the world’? Is it ashamed of the political freedoms it seems to boast about only in times of war? Does it believe that only americans deserve to have such a constitution; that only americans are worthy of enjoying political freedoms; that these political freedoms provide no help in bringing about economic well being? The answer to these questions is that the united states’ foreign policies are often dictated by multi-national corporations - and these corporations see the world solely as a storehouse of resources to be exploited for the benefit of american consumers and american shareholders. But since when have the mcdisneycoke corporations known how to run democracies rather than money making enterprises?

And this raises another paradox about american society, another failure of american politics. It might have been thought that the greater the power of the global communications’ network the more attention would be given to the discovery and solving of the world’s problems. America possesses the world’s greatest system of communications, and yet this system hasn’t been used to highlight the fact that half of the world’s population, 3 billion oomans, are living on less than 3 dollars a week but, on the contrary, has been used to legitimize americans’ consumption of a quarter of the world’s resources - even though they compose only a tiny minority of the world’s population. As has been stated above, american news networks have given up providing foreign news coverage. No matter how nice, how pleasant the people in the american media are, they are part of an evil capitalist empire. The proof of this is all around the world. But they just can’t see it - or rather they just won’t show it. It has taken the establishment of a broadcasting company in qatar to start showing what american networks weren’t interested in showing.

Finally, is it not incredible that americans have the greatest political constitution ever written which provides them with a huge surfeit of political freedoms, and yet livestock can’t be bothered to use these freedoms to create a better world and a sustainable planet, whilst the third world has virtually no political freedoms and is desperate for such freedoms?

American politicians argued that the ‘war against terrorism’ required freezing terrorists’ bank accounts to stop the funding of terrorist activities. On september 25th they decided they should also try to dry up the sources of terrorists’ funds: in particular, stopping the taliban from earning money from the export of heroin. Politically, this was a neat ploy because it harnessed middle class americans’ fears about hard drugs to further discredit the taliban regime and to bolster popular support for the war against (non zionist) terrorism. The following day the northern alliance held a photo opportunity to exploit this propaganda development by burning “captured taliban heroin” thereby sending out the message that they would abolish the drugs trade if the americans installed them in power. The problem is that the taliban has been trying to end the growing of poppies and the export of heroin whilst the northern alliance is a collection of drugs’ gangs who buy weapons with the proceeds from heroin sales - just as the americans’ showed them.

The poppy is a vital crop for many destitute afghanistani farmers. If they are to stop growing it they would need an alternative source of revenue. In a bbc interview a taliban leader stated that the taliban would love to stop the production of this drug but it was simply impossible for them to do this at the present time because it would have caused an uprising, “We can’t take action against poppy cultivation right now. The economy is destroyed. And the people are very, very unhappy. They will turn against us if we stop it now. But eventually we do want to stop poppy cultivation.”[72] This spokesperson seemed quite genuine. There is good reason to believe he was telling the truth. The taliban deserve the benefit of the doubt because they had taken measures to ban nicotine and alcohol. Indeed, once in power, “They used tanks to destroy bottles of afghanistan brandy.”[73] It is remarkable the way that john simpson slagged off the taliban for destroying the brandy, implying that it was terrible to infringe people’s ooman right to drink alcohol, and then turned the taliban into liars by pointing out that their promise to, “end afghanistan’s opium production.”[74] had not been fulfilled. The taliban would have banned poppy cultivation, as they had done alcohol, if they could, if the country hadn’t been in a state of destitution.

At this point perhaps it would be worthwhile to put the taliban in a clearer perspective. It ought to be pointed out that the taliban’s position is far superior to that of tony mcblair who has been encouraging the consumption of tobacco and alcohol, and has recently passed laws for a huge expansion of gambling. He was even perfectly willing for his party to accept a million pound bribe for not banning tobacco advertising until the press found out about it. Mcblair is a moralistic phoney in comparison to the decency of the taliban.

In 2000, there was an agreement between the taliban and the international community in which the taliban would try and stop the growing of poppies in return for help in providing an alternative crop. Not too surprisingly, the decadent westerners reneged on the deal. As a consequence, on september 26th, with a war on the horizon, the taliban lifted the ban in order to win back the support they had lost, “The taliban yesterday lifted a ban on farming opium poppies - raising fears of a flood of cheap heroin heading for the west. Afghan farmers will be allowed to plant seeds if the us and its allies launch a military attack. Thousands of farmers had to plough up their poppy fields last year as the taliban enforced a ban on the “un-islamic” crop.”[75]

Once again, america seemed on the verge of perpetuating terrorism in afghanistan. They began supporting the northern alliance in the belief that if they got into power they would abolish the country’s heroin trade - when all that the alliance is likely to do is reopen it as soon as they can. And was it not rather worrying that the american government was thinking about financing and arming the northern alliance which is yet another collection of disparate groups unified only by a common enemy? “The northern alliance .. is a 15,000 strong patchwork of fierce rival tribal factions led by warlords.”[76] And what exactly is going to happen to this alliance when this common enemy has been removed? Even john simpson knew the all too obvious answer to this question.[77] It was only pakistani objections to the northern alliance which stopped america from repeating its earlier mistakes.

What makes america’s predicament even more laughable is that one reporter blames it for the drugs’ trade, “It (afghanistan) became the world’s main exporter of heroin after the soviet invasion in 1979 bought near anarchy. Production exploded as the afghan mujaheddin, with the help of western intelligence agencies, used drug sales to finance their war against the russians.”[78] In other words, the cia, which had a great deal of experience of running drugs’ operations in vietnam, were behind the drugs trade in afghanistan which ruined so many brutish and american lives. Once again, america deserves what it gets.

The fact that the taliban was inclined on religious grounds to curb the heroin trade made no difference to the bigots in the brutish government which has continued to pump out propaganda about the taliban exporting heroin. The sunday people screamed, “Osama bin laden’s evil money making opium empire is to be destroyed by allied jet bombers. The terrorist has stockpiled a £20 billion heroin mountain with the help of his taliban protectors. But now his afghan poppy fields are to be put under a “target and obliterate” mission by us-led operation infinite justice. A senior downing street source said: “In the three years after the taliban regime got to power, opium farm production doubled.” (The allies are planning to spray) tanks of potent defoliant capable of wiping out vast opium-field areas. The chemical - similar to agent orange used in the vietnam war - also prevents the crops from growing again for five years. It has been tested in colombia against the cocaine cartels’ plantations.”[79] The mirror joined in, “The home office says the 30 tonnes of heroin consumed by the 270,000 users in the uk has a street value of £2.3 billion.”[80] And even tony mcblair, our tobacco/alcohol/gambling loving mcmoralizer stated, “It is a regime founded on fear and funded on the drugs trade. The biggest drugs hoard in the world is in Afghanistan, controlled by the Taliban. Ninety per cent of the heroin on British streets originates in Afghanistan. The arms the Taliban are buying today are paid for with the lives of young British people buying their drugs on British streets. That is another part of their regime that we should seek to destroy.”[81] Boring. The taliban did not need to be confronted by a vast military invasion to persuade it to give up poppy production because it would have loved to have abolished it themselves .. if they could.