Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Syria. Show all posts

Friday, September 12, 2014

As I've said here before -- "Our young people get it!"

There Is No Future in War: Youth Rise Up, a Manifesto

(Statement written by Ben Norton, Tyra Walker, Anastasia Taylor, Alli McCracken, Colleen Moore, Jes Grobman, Ashley Lopez)

A peace sign printed on the American Flag is raised during a protest against the Vietnam War in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Archive / History Channel)

Once again, US politicians and pundits are beating the drums of war, trying to get our nation involved in yet another conflict. A few years ago it was Iran, with “all options on the table.” Last year it was a red line that threatened to drag us into the conflict in Syria. This time it’s Iraq.

We, the youth of America, have grown up in war, war war. War has become the new norm for our generation. But these conflicts—declared by older people but fought and paid for by young people—are robbing us of our future and we’re tired of it.

There is no future in war.

We, the youth of America, are taking a stand against war and reclaiming our future.

War does not work. Period.

War does not work from an economic perspective

In 2003 US politicians orchestrated the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq based on blatant lies—lies that have cost the American people over $3 trillion.

Imagine what we could have done with this money:

With $3 trillion dollars, we could have guaranteed free higher education for all interested Americans. Instead, we are wallowing in over $1 trillion in outstanding college loan debt.
With $3 trillion, we could have created a system of universal health care. Instead, affordable health care is still out of reach for many Americans and we have no idea if there will even be a Medicare system when we are old enough to retire.
With $3 trillion we could have renovated our decrepit public schools and crumbling public infrastructure, giving us the kind of foundation we need for a thriving nation in the decades to come.
With $3 trillion we could have created a national energy grid based not upon environmentally destructive fossil fuels, but upon renewable energy sources--something that our generation cares passionately about.
Our true foes—those endlessly gunning for war—have been waging an economic war against us. Our foes are the ones who say we must increase Pentagon spending while we cut food stamps, unemployment assistance, public transportation, and low-income housing. They are the ones who want to destroy the social safety net that past generations have worked so hard to build. They are the ones who underfund our public schools - which are more segregated today than they were under Jim Crow - and then privatize them. They are the ones who throw hundreds of thousands of young people in prison, thanks to the racist and classist war on drugs, and then privatize the prisons to exploit and profit off of incarcerated citizens who make close-to-zero wages.

Throwing money at war does nothing to address the real issues we face. We, the youth of our country, are the ones who will feel this pain. The cost of war is sucking us dry; it is burdening us with debts we will never be able to pay back.

And war doesn’t even work to create jobs. Politicians say they can’t cut the Pentagon budget because the weapons manufacturers create much-needed jobs. Yes, our generation need jobs. But if members of Congress really wants to use federal spending to help us find employment, the military is the worst investment. A $1 billion investment in military spending nets 11,600 jobs. The same investment in education reaps 29,100 jobs. Whether it’s education, healthcare or clean energy, investments in those sectors create many more job opportunities than the military. The military-industrial complex does a great job lining the pockets of politicians; it does a lousy job creating an economy that works for all.

War does not work from a national security and defense perspective

The war apologists claim war makes our future “safer” and “freer.” But since the tragic 9/11 attack, the US military response has made the world a more dangerous place. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, the NATO bombing of Libya, the use of predator drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen, and countless other examples of military operations have only increased violence and hatred. Iraqis and Afghans are certainly no safer and freer; we are certainly no safer and freer.

We refuse to let our brothers and sisters, both here and abroad, die for access to cheap Persian Gulf oil. The Iraqis, the Afghans, the Iranians, the Libyans, the Somalis, and the people of any other country our military circles like vultures, are not our enemies. They oppose terrorism more than we do; they are the ones who must bear its brunt. We must oppose US intervention not because we don’t care about them, but because we do.

War does not work from an environmental perspective.

War is not environmentally friendly. It never has been, and it never will be. Bombing destroys the environment. It damages forests and agricultural land. It ravages ecosystems, endangering species, even forcing some into extinction.

Bombing contaminates water and soil, often leaving it unsafe to use for centuries, even millennia. This is especially true with nuclear and chemical weapons, such as those dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the missiles containing depleted uranium the US used in Iraq. And because of weapons like these, infant mortality, genetic mutation, and cancer rates are exponentially higher in the civilian areas targeted. Children in Fallujah, Iraq, a city hit hard by these weapons, are born without limbs and missing organs.

The environmental costs of war are clearly not limited to isolated moments; they persist for many lifetimes. Heavy military vehicles, in conjunction with deforestation and climate change, lead to the emission of toxic dust from the ground. Even if their homes and livelihoods haven’t been destroyed by bombs, citizens who inhale these toxins are much more susceptible to a wide variety of diseases and health problems.

The US Department of Defense has long been the country’s largest consumer of fossil fuels. Military vehicles consume obscene quantities of oil for even small tasks. If we truly care about reversing, or at least mitigating, anthropogenic climate change—what many scientists recognize as a literal threat to the future of the human species—eliminating war would be an incredibly effective first step.

War does not work from a human rights perspective

The world isn’t any safer and freer for the million Iraqi civilians who died. How is freedom supposed to come at the tip of a bomb?

The debate rages back and forth; “specialists” fill the TV airwaves, repackaging the same tired excuses we’ve heard for years. Most of these “experts” are old white males. The people actually affected by our bombs and our guns--mostly young people of color--are nowhere to be seen. Their voices are silenced, their voices shouted over by the corporate media, by hawkish politicians, and by the profit-hungry military contractors.

War does not work from a historical perspective

War has never been about freedom and liberation; war has always been about profit and empire. American historian Howard Zinn once said “Wars are fundamentally internal policies. Wars are fought in order to control the population at home.”

Military intervention gives US corporations free reign in the countries we destroy. We bomb the country, targeting public infrastructure, and our corporations build it back up again. Fat cat CEOs make millions, even billions; the country, the people of the country, are left with mountains of debt. Our corporations own their infrastructure, their industrial capital, their natural resources. War is always a lose-lose for the people. Economic and political elite in both countries will make a fortune; the people of both countries will be the ones who have to pay for this fortune.

Defenders and purveyors of war have always done empty lip service to ideals like “freedom” and “democracy”; they have always repeated tired, vacuous tropes about “assisting,” or even “liberating” peoples.

How can we trust a country that says its brutal military invasion and occupation is “humanitarian,” when, at the same moment, it is supporting repressive dictators around the world? Saddam Hussein was on the CIA payroll since the 1960s. While we were invading Iraq to “overthrow tyranny” and “free” the Iraqi people, we were supporting the King Fahd’s theocratic tyranny in Saudi Arabia, the brutally repressive Khalifa family in Bahrain, and Mubarak’s violent regime in Egypt, among countless other unsavory dictators.

When we invaded Afghanistan to “free” the Afghan people from the Taliban, the corporate media failed to mention that Ronald Reagan had supported the Mujahideen, who later became the Taliban, and the Contras throughout the 1980s. He called the latter “the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers,” while they were disemboweling civilians in a campaign of terror.

These historical events are absolutely pertinent to contemporary discussions of war. We must learn from them, as to not repeat them in the future, as to not fall for the same past political tricks.

Our naysayers say we are against the troops. We are not against the troops. US troops are disproportionately from less-privileged backgrounds. Military recruiters target impoverished communities of color, and there are many recorded instances of them using deceptive tactics to get young citizens to sign long binding contracts. These are the troops that die in US military operations. They are not our enemies. We refuse to let our brothers and sisters be cannon fodder. The real people against the troops are the ones who send our country’s poor to die in rich people’s wars.

How many times do we have to be lied to, how many times do we have to be tricked, how many times do we have to be exploited until we say enough is enough? We are tired of war! War accomplishes nothing. War only fattens the wallets of economic and political elites, leaving millions dead in its wake. War only leads to more war, destroying the planet and emptying the national treasury in the process.

We, the youth of the United States of America, oppose war.
We oppose war not because we don’t care about the rest of the world; we oppose war precisely because we do.
We oppose war not because we don’t care about our security; we oppose war precisely because we do.
We oppose war not because we don’t care about our troops; we oppose war precisely because we do.
We oppose war not because we aren’t concerned with our future; we oppose war precisely because we do.

There is no future in war.  (HT CodePink)

Now -- if only OUR old asses would listen...

How many more of your "Wounded Warriors" are you willing to sacrifice for this confused and used fool as he ramps up going to war against ISIL/ISIS (or whatever name the West chooses to call them on any given day anyway)?  And WHAT is Cheney talking about with his "our "inability to shape events" -- what has the alleged United States of America been doing BUT shaping events the world over???

Related:
- “STOP HITTING YOURSELF”
- Say ‘No’ to War and Media Propaganda
- Neocons Revive Syria ‘Regime Change’ Plan
- The Islamic State (ISIS) Used to Justify Renewed U.S. “Humanitarian Bombings” in Iraq and Syria
- The Islamic State, the “Caliphate Project” and the “Global War on Terrorism”
- Mid-East In Depth: Did the U S "Engineer" the ISIS Attack on Iraq from Syria?

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Punked by Putin -- and rightfully so

(Updated below)
Russian president Vladimir Putin not only called the Obama Administration's bluff  by offering to intervene in Syria, he made the Changeling look like the warmongering, Murderer-in-Chief that he is -- to the entire world.  Большое спасибо, президент Путин!

(Photo courtesy of Leon Kuhn)
In his September 11 op-ed, Putin said to America -- what I'm sure -- plenty other countries are feeling.  He took the Changeling to the wood shed (with a few licks to Shrub for good measure), by using his own "rule of law" rhetoric to slap him in the face.  Who woulda thunk it?  The ex(?)-KGB guy comes out smellin' like a rose as he artfully lays bare all the crimes against humanity the U.S. government has committed over the last 12 years.  Priceless!

I'm sure the Zionist AIPACers, as well as the New World Order PNACers (now the FDDers) are mad as hell right now that their little chicken hawk (emphasis on chicken for so-o-o-o many reasons) mucked up their plans to steamroll the Middle East.  Good!  I'm sick of all of them any-damned-way.

John Pilger speaks to how their "absolute power corrupts absolutely" here:
Under the "weak" Obama, militarism has risen perhaps as never before. With not a single tank on the White House lawn, a military coup has taken place in Washington. In 2008, while his liberal devotees dried their eyes, Obama accepted the entire Pentagon of his predecessor, George Bush: its wars and war crimes. As the constitution is replaced by an emerging police state, those who destroyed Iraq with shock and awe, and piled up the rubble in Afghanistan and reduced Libya to a Hobbesian nightmare, are ascendant across the US administration. Behind their beribboned façade, more former US soldiers are killing themselves than are dying on battlefields. Last year, 6,500 veterans took their own lives. Put out more flags.

The historian Norman Pollack calls this "liberal fascism". "For goose-steppers," he wrote, "substitute the seemingly more innocuous militarisation of the total culture. And for the bombastic leader, we have the reformer manqué, blithely at work, planning and executing assassination, smiling all the while." Every Tuesday, the "humanitarian" Obama personally oversees a worldwide terror network of drones that "bugsplat" people, their rescuers and mourners. In the west's comfort zones, the first black leader of the land of slavery still feels good, as if his very existence represents a social advance, regardless of his trail of blood. This obeisance to a symbol has all but destroyed the US anti-war movement: Obama's singular achievement. (all emphasis mine)
Read that last line again -- especially all you Black, "symbolism" folk (Soror Norton, are you listening?).  Quite frankly, I could give two shits about a little boy touching the Changeling's hair in the Oval Office -- we're talking about the MURDER of non-white peoples in which he's voluntarily complicit on a huge scale!  How's that for "symbolism?"  Wake the hell up, people (trust me, critical thinking is your friend)!   This is not about Republicans versus Democrats, Family.  That's some manufactured shit, specifically designed to delude.  They're all really the same -- none of whom is "us."

And wonder of wonders, Putin's gambit worked:
The just announced U.S.-Russia agreement in Geneva on a "joint determination to ensure the destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons (CW) program in the soonest and safest manner" sounds the death knell to an attempt by Israel, Turkey and Saudi Arabia to get the U.S. into the war in Syria.
For now, the Changeling's marching orders have changed (cuz he ain't runnin' Jack!).  But don't hold your breath.  As history dictates -- he'll get new ones :



***UPDATE:  Well, it didn't take long for the Changeling to get those new "marching orders"--  Obama to host Benjamin Netanyahu at White House:
Netanyahu said earlier Tuesday that Iran would be at the top of his agenda.

“I intend to focus on the question of stopping Iran's nuclear program, an actual halt to the nuclear program," the Israeli leader said. "And until this is achieved, the pressure on Iran should be intensified and not eased."

Netanyahu also pressed for the United States to strike Syria after an August chemical weapons attack attributed to strongman Bashar Assad’s regime. (emphasis mine)
Um, Bibi?  Stop lying, mkay?  The IAEA has confirmed, time and again, that Iran's "nuclear" program is currently only being used for civilian energy and medicine.  It has no weapons-grade nuclear program unlike Israel's stockpile (thanks to Dr. Vanunu, we all know unequivocally -- you do have a stockpile!).  That said, I see no reason why this sovereign nation shouldn't develop a weapons-grade nuclear program to defend themselves against the likes of those Hitler, Jr. Zionists who are already oppressing their brethren in Palestine.

And of course, Israel's little puppet fell right in line with this little veiled threat, revealing how little he really cares about those children allegedly gassed by Assad and how much he really cares about Israel:
However, Obama recently warned that Iran should not be emboldened by his decision to call off a strike on Syria.

“What the Iranians understand is that the nuclear issue is a far larger issue for us than the chemical weapons issue,” Obama said during an interview this week with ABC. “The threat against Iran — against Israel — that a nuclear Iran poses, is much closer to our core interests. A nuclear arms race in the region is something that would be profoundly destabilizing.” (emphasis mine)
Was that a Freudian slip exposing Israel in his second sentence?  Nah, he doesn't have the guts to do anything like that.  He'd rather be led around by the nose into a war for which he will be eternally blamed -- way to literally "go down" in history, Mr. First Black President.  {smdh}

Related:
- The Honey Obadger: He Don’t Give a Shit
- Taking Exception to Exceptionalism
- Continuity of Military Agenda: Syria Catastrophe Engineered Under Bush, Executed Verbatim Under Obama
- Empire, Hypocrisy and Deflection
- Assad tells Obama to stop arming rebels, or no deal
- US Grandstands on Chemical Weapons Treaty While Violating It
- Syria Distraction Gone, What Will Obama Use to Cover Passage of TPP or a Comparable Sneak Attack on the Middle Class?
- Background and Articles relating to Project for a New American Century

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Another Black tool lies us into war, only this one is a Nobel Peace Prize winning warmonger

Seems the American public hasn't learned a damned thing about being lied into war.  Remember when white supremacy put a Black face on that one too -- props and all?


Margaret Kimberley's Colin Powell Busted post over at Freedom Rider a couple days ago included a photo of a bust of Powell holding up that vial at the U.N. as he lied us into Iraq.  Stunning likeness, no?

(Photo courtesy Merrily Kerr, New York Art Tours)
I swear, tools will do anything to be in the spotlight.  Powell's lies, immortalized in bronze and concrete, will  forever be a reminder  of what falling for anything will do to you.  Not only will the Murder-in-Chief's homage be way grander than a bust once they're finished with him (Impeachment?  International War Crimes Tribunal? -- one can only hope),  it'll be fodder for "stupid Black people in power" jokes -- for years to come.

I've been sitting here shaking my head incredulously as I keep reading the same kind of bullshit the tools in the White House and the mainstream media served up to "we the people" in the run-up to the Iraq war.  This level of hubris is just unconscionable.  Do they think all of us are stupid enough to believe them -- again?  Or do they just not give a damn?  Don't bother answering, both questions were rhetorical.

I didn't believe them from the beginning and I sure don't believe them now.  Given the recently released declassified CIA documents showing how dirty their hands were during their "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" shenanigans during the Iraq/Iran War, coupled with the facts in this unsettling information, there's certainly no reason for anybody else to believe them either.

If there were chemical weapons used (and that's a huge "if"), I believe the West and Israel are involved in providing them to the rebels.  Why?  For one, this is what ole Pinnocchio said today:
“First of all, I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line,” Obama said, despite his statement a year ago that President Bashar Assad would cross a “red line” with him if chemical weapons were deployed in Syria’s civil war.

“So when I said that my calculus would be altered by chemical weapons, which the overall consensus of humanity says is wrong — that’s not something I just made up. I didn’t pick it out of thin air,” Obama said. “My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line, and America and Congress’s credibility’s on the line.” (emphasis mine)
If that's not Zionist-speak, harkening back to the days of the Jewish Holocaust when the world, the international community sat back and watched Hitler's massacre in Germany, I don't know what is (like the Zionists care more about the lives of those oft-labeled, "sand niggers" in Syria than they do their capitalist plundering of their land and resources -- What?  You know as well as I do that's what those of a decidedly alabaster hue call them, so quit playing).  I swear, Shirley Chisholm must be rolling over in her grave too as it is so very apparent this man is, unlike her -- definitely both "Bought" and "Bossed."  {smdh}

Anyway, there are a number of answers to that, "Why?" and greater minds than mine do a way better job of articulating the myriad of reasons than I ever possibly could.  So, here's Pepe Escobar, my favorite "roving correspondent" for Asia Times,  laying out some very compelling points on GRTV:



And here, he not only reiterates them, he shares his take on the Changeling's ass-backward foreign policy, with a few observations from Stephen Schlesinger on RT News:



Family, please stop letting the Changeling bamboozle you, sullying Dr. King's memory with the implication that he's some representation of anything for which he stood.  The only thing Dr. King had to say that even remotely describes this White Supremacist Capitalist Patriarchy's trojan horse is -- that he represents "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world."

Make no mistake people, Obama is no King (though in a weird, either Freudian-slip or just plain ignorant way, he's better described as the white folk's, "Joshua") -- as evidenced by the extremely huge chasm between his words and motivations for a strike on Syria, and these shared by Dr. King in his "Beyond Vietnam:  A Time to Break Silence" speech (posted in the sidebar -- if for nothing else but nostalgia's sake, do take the time to listen to it):
Now, it should be incandescently clear that no one who has any concern for the integrity and life of America today can ignore the present war. If America's soul becomes totally poisoned, part of the autopsy must read Vietnam. It can never be saved so long as it destroys the deepest hopes of men the world over. So it is that those of us who are yet determined that America will be are led down the path of protest and dissent, working for the health of our land.

As if the weight of such a commitment to the life and health of America were not enough, another burden of responsibility was placed upon me in 1964; and I cannot forget that the Nobel Prize for Peace was also a commission -- a commission to work harder than I had ever worked before for "the brotherhood of man." This is a calling that takes me beyond national allegiances, but even if it were not present I would yet have to live with the meaning of my commitment to the ministry of Jesus Christ. To me the relationship of this ministry to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war. Could it be that they do not know that the good news was meant for all men -- for Communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative? Have they forgotten that my ministry is in obedience to the one who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them? What then can I say to the "Vietcong" or to Castro or to Mao as a faithful minister of this one? Can I threaten them with death or must I not share with them my life? (emphasis mine)
Bet the Nobel Peace Prize Committee's feeling pre-t-t-t-y damned foolish right about now.  If they're not, they sure as hell should be!  Seems they not only erroneously thought all Black folks looked alike -- but thought alike as well. {smdh}

Related:
- Prince Bandar and Zionist lobby partnering to force Obama into prolonged war with Syria
- The World Has Condemned Bashar al-Assad For Firing Chemical Weapons — But Did He Actually Do it?
- U.S. About to Act with Impunity and Attack Syria
- The Drums of War are Beating: Killing Civilians to Protect Civilians in Syria
- Syria regime vows to defend itself
- The Prince: Meet the Man Who Co-Opted Democracy in the Middle East

Friday, November 16, 2012

A Colin Powell, WMD lecture redux?

Well, it seems it's not enough for the Changeling to back Israel's bloody hands -- seems he's gearing up to get the hands of your sons, daughters, husbands and wives a little bloody as well -- (h/t Pan-African News Wire):

Pentagon Has Plans to Intervene In Syria Under Guise of Seizing "WMD"

Pentagon Says 75,000 Troops Might Be Needed to Seize Syria Chemical Arms

By DAVID E. SANGER and ERIC SCHMITT
New York Times

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon has told the Obama administration that any military effort to seize Syria’s stockpiles of chemical weapons would require upward of 75,000 troops, amid increasing concern that the militant group Hezbollah has set up small training camps close to some of the chemical weapons depots, according to senior American officials...

...Mr. Obama has been clear for more than a year that he would resist direct American intervention, but in August he said one circumstance would cause him to revisit that position. “A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized,” he said at a news conference. “That would change my calculus.”

Mr. Obama brought those concerns up again in a news conference on Wednesday, saying that the United States was in close contact with Turkey and Jordan “and obviously Israel, which is having already grave concerns as we do about, for example, movements of chemical weapons that might occur in such a chaotic atmosphere and that could have an impact not just within Syria but on the region as a whole.”...

There is credible information that the Assad regime has been upgrading and expanding its chemical weapons arsenal, which needs to be maintained,” said Emile Hokayem, a Middle East analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “A credible delivery capability is also needed, hence the North Korean angle.”

The estimation that it would take 75,000 troops to neutralize the chemical weapons grew out of what Mr. Obama, in his August news conference, referred to as extensive contingency planning for how the United States would respond if the chemical weapons were on the move or appeared vulnerable. (all emphasis mine)

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me!"

Okay, y'all really got to be shittin' me!!  You mean to tell me that all of you, so washed in Obama-love, will fall for this bullshit -- again! -- just because it's coming from Chocolate Jesus!  If you are -- I tell you,  he's the BEST, damned, deus ex machina (a person or thing that appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty) money could buy -- and they've paid billions!

Come on people!  You watched Colin Powell, lie his integrity into the toilet for Shrub & Co. with all those, made-for-TV, show-and-tell diagrams about Iraq's WMDs at the U.N.  Don't fall for this let-us-murder-more-folk trick again!  Unless of course, you don't mind sending your loved ones into harm's way while his are snug as a bug in a rug.  Based on my personal experience, it truly is not worth it -- but you decide.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

NPR on Syria - "Through the looking glass darkly"



Had to run some errands today, but Son #1 was using my car. The husband was home early so I asked him to take me (Yes, I can drive myself, but er, uh -- long story). As we rode, NPR was on, broadcasting the above story and all I could do for the duration, was suck my damned teeth -- and seethe (Yes, I realize I have issues -- with people who lie, either by omission, or outrightly.  But I have a particular disdain for those whose job it is to provide taxpayer-funded, "fair and balanced reporting").

NPR's "pot, calling the kettle black" story was American sensationalism at its best.  Other than the infamous Abu Ghraib, whose story was only accidentally told as a result of a soldier with some conscience,  how much have they reported, in detail, about the goings on at either Bagram, or GITMO (which the Changeling vowed he'd close -- even as he crowed about Afghanistan being the "necessary war," -- if you'd just vote for "Change you can believe in."  And getting  a damned Nobel Peace Prize for it to boot!)?  Yes, the Fourth Estate certainly gives me the dry heaves.

But when I got home and checked my email, seeing Clara Gutteridge's, How the US Rendered, Tortured and Discarded One Innocent Man in The Nation, I heard my Gra'mama say, "Chile, you thought that right up!"  And it seemed I had:

At our first meetings in Stone Town, the crumbling capital of Zanzibar, Suleiman would turn up wild-eyed, refusing food because eating upset his stomach. We soon forged a routine of driving together into the bush, where, he said, he could find peace. On our first trip, Suleiman drove to a derelict underground prison that had once been used by Arab slave traders, a dungeon that presumably resembled the first place he was held in Afghanistan, a secret prison he called “The Darkness.”

When Suleiman arrived there, he thought he was back home in Zanzibar, so overwhelming was the distinctive smell of the coral reef. (A clinical psychologist would later explain that olfactory hallucinations are a common response to extremely stressful situations. They are the brain’s way of making one think there is something familiar to hold on to.) In fact, Suleiman was thousands of kilometers from his familiar Indian Ocean reefs, in an underground prison in central Afghanistan.

“It was pitch black, with constant noise and not enough food,” he recalled. His American interrogators would pour freezing cold water on him and beat him, saying, “We know you are a sea man, but here we have more water than out there in the sea. It never stops raining here.” Suleiman also describes being hung from the ceiling in the “strappado position,” slung in chains so that his toes just touched the floor. He also says American interrogators would take the ablution jug (used by Muslims for ritual cleansing before prayer), and stick its long spout up his rectum.

In mid-2003, Suleiman arrived at Bagram, where he was ordered to stand within the outline of a square drawn on the floor. “From today onward, your name is 1075,” the American guards told him. “You are in our box, and we have five basic rules: One: No talking. Two: Don’t look around. Keep your face down. Three: Don’t touch anything around the cage. Four: Don’t speak. Five: Don’t run.” Later, one of the guards looked at tall, skinny Suleiman and said, “You must be related to Snoop Dogg. Maybe he’s your father.” After this Suleiman’s name at Bagram was Snoop Dogg.

At Bagram, Suleiman never saw the sun, only the constant, blinding lights hanging just above his wire-mesh cage. He says he would look at the birds flying among the rafters, swooping down to peck around his cage. Bird droppings fell from the high ceiling through the mesh. Watching them, Suleiman would think, “Look at me today! I am on the side that the birds ought to be. I am in the cage, and they are free!”

Suleiman was finally released in July 2008. What prompted the decision is unclear. Authorities most likely realized that he had little intelligence to offer and posed no threat. So they let him go. (emphasis mine)

Syria's "war crimes" are no better, nor worse than those of my countrymen. I say to NPR, "Look in the mirror!  If you want to contribute to a better country, expend your energy on the schizophrenic, "American exceptionalism" in your own backyard (either before, or as, you point the finger at other folk)!" Anything else is simply taxpayer-funded hypocrisy playing handmaiden to imperialism.




Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...