From US cartoonist Mikhaela‘s blog:
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
The War in Afghanistan‘s REAL Victims
In the wake of a U.S. airstrike that killed more than 100 Afghan civilians, the mainstream media wonders: “How will those dead kids harm American PR?”
As FAIR puts it in their analysis of mainstream coverage: “One has to wonder about the values of a press where U.S. taxpayer-funded slaughter of civilians elicits journalists’ concern not about victims, but about the war’s popularity with the population having record numbers of bombs dropped on them and how that might hamper U.S. strategic goals.”
By the way, Obama’s top security adviser says he has no plans to halt the airstrikes because “we have to have a full complement of our offensive military power when we need it.”
For my previous cartoons on this subject, see “War Marketeers!” and “Milly Jones: America-Hating PR representative“.
Dear Kitty. Some blog 
Afghan official: 95 kids died in US-Taliban clash
13.05.09 17:04
Ninety-five Afghan children are among the 140 people said to have died in a recent U.S.-Taliban battle in western Afghanistan, according to a list drawn up by Afghan officials, a lawmaker said Wednesday. The U.S. military disputed the claim, AP reported.
Afghans blame U.S. airstrikes for the deaths and destruction in the villages of Gerani and Ganjabad in Farah province.
Sixty-five of the reported victims on the list were female, either adults or children, said lawmaker Obaidullah Helali, a lawmaker from Farah and a member of the government’s investigative team. If the Afghan toll is correct, it would be the largest case of civilian deaths since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion to oust the Taliban.
http://news-en.trend.az/world/afghanistan/1469761.html
LikeLike
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/sader100509.html
10.05.09
The Obama Government’s First Massacre
by Emir Sader
“Nothing will serve as excuse for Obama. Massacres are and will be inevitable as long as the war of occupation continues in Afghanistan.”
One may have more or less sympathy for the new US president, more or less believe in his words, more or less value the change in the US government’s tone when handling its differences with other governments. But there is a limit when it comes to judging the character of a president and a government. That limit has now been reached, with the massacre of at least 150 civilians in Afghanistan.
There had already been deaths, in the previous week, of some hundreds of alleged militants at the hands of the Pakistani Army, whose credibility is nil and makes one suspect that the dead were largely civilians exhibited as Taliban, in an attempt to minimally restore the army’s image. The US government can pretend to believe in that version.
But now the stories of the Afghan massacre are coming from the very authorities of Afghanistan, a country occupied by Western troops, commanded by the US. At least 150 people — the vast majority of them women and children, a clear indication that they were civilians became victims of bombings by Western troops. Nothing can hide it, nor is there any room for doubt.
What stance will the new US president take? Consider these deaths as “unwanted collateral damage”? Or as “risks that come with all military conflicts”? Or as “civilians who were human shields for terrorists”? Or “open a rigorous investigation to establish responsibilies”? Or “offer apology to the Afghan people for this unforgivable mistake”? Or “order relief efforts for involuntary victims of war”?
Nothing will serve as excuse for Obama. Massacres are and will be inevitable as long as the war of occupation continues in Afghanistan. Having won the Democratic Party primaries with a generally progressive platform, Obama went on to face his Republican opponent, who accused him of being “soft” and unprepared to accept what he considered to be US interests in the world — a synonym for “endless wars” unleashed by the Bush government against all international law. In order to extricate himself from that accusation, while keeping his promise to withdraw the troops from Iraq, Obama set up an equation according to which the US shall withdraw its troops from Iraq and transfer them to Afghanistan.
Strange reasoning. What difference is there between the two epicenters of “endless wars,” except that in the Afghan case, still under the impact of the attacks that it had suffered, the US obtained the UN Security Council’s endorsement for the invasion? Is there any other difference between the two cases of invasion and subjection of the two peoples to foreign troops? Are the governments of these two countries freely chosen by their peoples or are they the occupying authorities imposed, in both cases, by force of arms? If some element of similarity had been missing, the Obama government’s first massacre came to confirm the absolute similarity of the two cases.
The character of a person is made clear primarily by his actions, and so is that of a government. We know so many cases of people personally involved in torture who continued to be good family men. Is it possible to regard them as persons of good character? Can contingent private virtues absolve public vices?
For those who are carried away by the captivating smile of Obama and the elegance of Michelle, this first massacre should serve as the test of his character, private and public. The Obama government will not be the same once it becomes impossible not to see the brutality of what the troops of his country, under his command, are doing in Afghanistan and in Iraq. No government can remain the same once it begins to live with such massacres as this, for which it is directly responsible. The relatives of the Afghan dead — women, children, old people, their families, and the Afghan people — expect and deserve a word from Obama; their deaths didn’t happen because of what was done when Obama was just a kid, but because of his government and his decision to intensify, rather than end, the brutal occupation of Afghanistan.
The original article “O primeiro massacre do governo Obama” was published in the Blog do Emir section of the Agencia Carta Maior on 6 May 2009. Translation by Yoshie Furuhashi.
LikeLike
Pingback: 31 US soldiers die in Afghanistan helicopter crash | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Paul Hardcastle remixes song, against Afghan war now | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Stop wars in Iraq and Afghanistan | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: U.S. death toll in Afghanistan 1,000 | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Malalai Joya on occupied ‘new’ Afghanistan | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Civilians suffer in wars | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Afghan Malalai Joya on US bombs | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: US soldiers arrest Afghan journalist | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Four Georgian soldiers killed in Afghanistan | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Nuclear weapons, Afghan war, in British election | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Corrupt occupation in Afghanistan, new film | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Thomas Friedman’s militarist propaganda | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: 007 wins Afghan war | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Murdered Afghan civilians’ fingers as soldiers’ trophies | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: NATO kills 10 Afghan election campaigners | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Afghan air strike massacre report not published? | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Afghanistan, $1 million per US soldier, per year | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Afghan war puts Berlusconi under pressure | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, world’s most corrupt | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Afghan feminist opposes war | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: Bahrain dictatorship-British government links exposed | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: War, not ‘reconstruction’ in Afghanistan | Dear Kitty. Some blog
Pingback: United States public relations corporations help dictators | Dear Kitty. Some blog