|..:: Hot News:|
Sunday, 01.13.2013, 08:51pm (GMT+1)
In 2010, there were more than 14,000 murders in the U.S. But how many Americans are aware that not a single murder was perpetrated by a Muslim? And while the West has made terrorism synonymous with Muslims, how many Americans are aware that the first terrorists accorded a place in history were not Muslims… but Jews? Misconceptions surrounding the subject of terrorism are legion. According to history the world’s first terrorists were two militant Jewish revolutionary groups, the Zealots and the Sicarii. Determined to liberate Judea from Roman occupation, these groups used violence to provoke a popular uprising which historians credit with precipitating the Jewish War of A.D. 66, committing numerous public assassinations and other audacious acts of violence in Judea from approximately 4 B.C. to A.D. 70. Their struggle for independence would end at Masada. The use of the ubiquitous car bomb did not originate in Iraq, Afghanistan or any other Muslim state, but in Ireland among the Irish Republican Army (IRA), a Catholic secessionist group enmeshed in an eight-hundred-year struggle against Protestant Britain. In the 1980s, terrorism spread to numerous countries around the globe, countries seeking to liberate themselves from the shackles of European colonialism. For political expediency, the issue of terrorism has been hyped beyond any sense of actual fact or rationale by bureaucrats and defense contractors, for reasons best known to them. Recent data suggests that terrorists worldwide are in decline, but for vested interests, the war on terror must go on. And then, in existence, we have the media security experts… the ‘talking heads’ for whom no lie is too big.
All of these movements have a common theme…the right of self-determination. Independence movements generally do not have an air force a navy or high-tech weaponry with which to oppose their adversaries. Often times they resort to suicide terrorism. But the question must be asked…what constitutes terrorism and who and what entity defines such? It is imperative that the history of terrorism become faithfully taught, understood, and a part of public discourse. Deaths attributed to the West’s response to terrorism has been calculated to be in the millions and loss of property valued in the hundreds of billions. Much if not all of this unmitigated savagery and vigilantism can be traced directly to the effects of historical revisionism, the precursor to war. Vigilantism can be traced to the violent expansion and settlement of the Western United States during the 19th century when and where violent, self-righteous vigilantes operated outside of the constraints found in a court of law. It can be argued that modern-day vigilantes are the United States and Members of the NATO contingent now waging illegal war in Afghanistan.
Thanks to the diligent efforts of a number of independent, scrupulous investigative journalists not beholden to the military industrial complex (MIC), we now know that beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt, Iraq did not and never had possessed weapons-of-mass-destruction, (WMD) as charged by the administration of George W. Bush, and that Afghanistan had not played a role in the attack on America on 9/11. Then too, we have learned that while the Taliban played host to Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar ordered that he be placed under virtual ‘house arrest’ referring to his infamous guest as the “guest who burned down the guesthouse” and to insure as well that his comportment did not cause or rise to the level of diplomatic or international ostracism and or sanction for Afghanistan. And we have also learned that the Taliban provided several opportunities for the Bush Administration to extradite Osama bin Laden but to no avail. Here, historical revisionism led to war, an unknowing and or indifferent public was purposefully kept uninformed to stifle critical debate and or opposition.
While America and other members of NATO justify their military assault on Afghanistan in terms of combatting international terror and or al-Qaeda more specifically, how many of them are actually aware that 837 members of al-Qaeda were granted Afghan citizenship by and during the administration of the late Ahmad Shah Massoud and Burhannudin Rabbani, both of whom who with their respective armed forces served as a proxy-militia for the U.S.-led, anti-Taliban NATO contingent.
Cast as a potential Afghan leader in a British (MI6) sponsored intelligence and media propaganda plot as the ‘Tito of Afghanistan’, British intelligence conspired with (ITN) journalist Sandy Gall to promote and groom Massoud as heir apparent for the role of President of Afghanistan. In his book, ‘News from the Front, a Television Reporter’s Life’ (1994) Sandy Gall relates MI6’s ‘king maker’ plan. (4) Also known as the ‘Lion of the Panjshir’ by scores of adoring Western fans, bureaucrats and literary agents, few were in fact aware that Ahmad Shah Massoud, while pretending to fight the Russians, was serving concurrently as a Soviet KGB and GRU collaborator. (1, 4)
Among a legion of Russian admirers, Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov had this to say in remembrance of Massoud while delivering a eulogy during his visit to his tomb in 2003:
“Ahmad Shah Massoud was a hero like the Russian generals who served bravely in Afghanistan. He was ever a faithful friend to Russia”. (2)
It could reasonably be argued therefore that Massoud’s alleged military prowess and celebrity which had been built upon an extraordinary public relations campaign launched by adoring fans and nurtured by latent historical revisionism disseminated through TV and print-media organizations, exacerbated or fueled the anti-Pashtun bias extent in Washington and elsewhere and as a result facilitated the Northern Alliance’s political ascendancy giving rise to international vigilantism as well. While many an exacting, open-minded researcher seeking the uncompromised truth is aware and armed with these facts, thanks to historical revisionism, the general public, however, is not. (3)
And how many Americans are aware that many of those who currently resist American aggression in Afghanistan were, during the 1980s, recruited by the CIA to resist Soviet aggression during their 10-year war in Afghanistan? These are facts that should be acknowledged and a part of public debate.
When a citizen is in armed opposition to invasion, occupation and foreign rule, is he properly cast in the role of ‘insurgent’ or ‘terrorist’? Is the act of self-obliteration utilizing an explosive-laden vest a more heinous crime than the dropping of thousands-of-tons of explosives on rural villages, destroying all manifestations of life and property, the use of highly toxic depleted uranium, unmanned drones, or the savage, execution style attack on twenty-four men, women and children in Haditha by U.S. Marines?
History accords that the word ‘terrorism’ was coined during the French Revolution and encompassed those who resisted the brutal reign of the so-called ‘Jacobins’ institutionalized torture, incorporating imprisonment, rape, dismemberment, and summary execution on the gallows. In this instance, as with Western custom, the aggressive war making state casts those in opposition as ‘terrorists.’
To mitigate public criticism and limit and or obscure debate, today’s war makers refer to the slaughter of innocents as nameless ‘insurgents’ and or ‘terrorists’ and are therefore inhuman and not afforded the protection contained in numerous treaties and conventions encompassing the laws and customs of war, thereby acting as 19th century hangmen, rendering international statutes as moot, unenforceable. The justification for war has been facilitated and reinforced by historical revisionism. For example, Afghanistan has been labeled by both the Bush and Obama Administrations as “the hub of international terrorism”. The fact that this is untrue has not given pause, nor has it brought a halt to a brutal invasion and occupation of a nation by the 21st century vigilantes, a nation that has not ever represented a threat to America or any other country for that matter. Historical revisionism has eclipsed the truth about America’s wars. The American public has not been well-informed as to how their government prosecutes wars thanks to the politically-expedient media-rendering of events and history.
These are the questions that must be addressed by the public who then must make discerning demands of the media. But as we have seen, the incestuous media fraternity has and continues to assume the disquieting role of complicit enable and in the process is complicit in the usurpation of Afghanistan’s historical probity. Historical evidence proves that historical revisionism and extra-legal wars are the breeding ground for international vigilantism, or war with no rules and or boundaries. With some justification, it has been said that “terrorism is the poor man’s war and war is the rich man’s terrorism.”
Bruce G. Richardson
(1) American Raj, Liberation or Domination, Resolving the Conflict between the West and the Muslim World, Eric S. Margolis, 2008, p.196, and The Soldiers Story, Heinamaa, Anna, and Yuri Yurchenko, ‘The Soldiers Story, Soviet Veterans Remember the Afghan War’, 1994, pp. 113-122.
(2) Asia Times,’ Russia Memorializes fallen Afghan Leader’, Pavel H. Felgenhauer, August 7, 2004, p.13-C.
(3) Afghanistan, Political Frailty and External Interference, Dr. Nabi Misdaq, 2006, p.330N and The Hand of Moscow, Leonid Shebarshin, Director Foreign Intelligence (KGB), 1992.
(4) News from the Front, a Television Reporter’s Life, Sandy Gall, 1994, p.118.