"Marines on Taliban Killing Hunt! reads the caption title below the CNN video of Darth Vader-like heavy caliber weapons in the hands of heroic U.S. Marines in armored cars entering a poor little Afghan town.
Anchor Wolf Blitzer, in a voice filled with determination, describes how Marines have invaded a village long under Taliban 'control', (truth is, it is more correct to say 'under Taliban government provincial administration') Audacious caption on the screen below the video - "Marines on Taliban Killing Hunt!"
The same day we hear CNN all day characterizing as "outrageous" Rev. Jeremiah Wright's quoting the Bible on terror coming back to those who use terror. Just imagine! Accusing the U.S. of using terror.
(Nothing new here. Corporate media's Washington Post, New York Times and Wall Street Journal all vilified Rev. Martin Luther King after his 1967 speech in which he condemned U.S. genocide in Vietnam and a murderous foreign policy world wide.)
No contradiction seen in that the Taliban was the government when the U.S. invaded, (in spite of having earlier supported the Taliban over its insurgents, CIA supported Osama bin Laden as well).
No problem that the very Afghan legislature elected under U.S. occupation rules passed a bill asking for negotiations with the Taliban (prohibited from participating in that election), amnesty for all who have been involved in hostilities for decades and over and over called for an end to the air strikes that have been taking a heartbreaking toll of innocent lives of all ages.
Question: Who used Islamic fundamentalist terror first in Afghanistan anyway?
Answer: President Jimmy Carter.
Presidential Advisor Zbigniew Bzrezinski bragged about funding the hill tribes terrorizing the 1979 socialist women-schooling government in Kabul with the stated purpose of suckering the USSR to intervene militarily, which to Bzrezinki's joy it did, six months later. Bzrezinski has taken credit for his advice to Carter having ultimately caused the collapse of the Soviet Union.
It has long become widely accepted, as affirmed by Bzrezinski to a French newspaper reporter in 1998, that the price paid in having suffered the blow-back terror of 9/11 was worth having ended the cold war in victory with break-up of the Soviet Union as a result of its costly years of failed warring in Afghanistan.
The motto of the President of the United States in justifying the invasion and occupation of a whole nation with all the innocents what would be condemned to die in such an invasion, was the old adage of supposition: 'The friend of my enemy is my enemy too!'
[An aside: Sometime after the withdrawal, happened to chat with an Afghani New York taxi driver: He was a handsome bearded pleasant enough fellow, family man, three kids. Asked him, "what do you and your friends think of the Taliban?" By then had read that the Taliban was strict, honest and bringing protection and stability to a society torn apart by factions of different war lords, each out for their own cause and benefit regardless of the suffering they were causing and disrespectful of any law in their bombing of each other during while a disregard for the virtue of women went on and the lives of general public. The driver answered me along the same lines with great sincerity and resolve in his support for the efforts of the Taliban to prevail in the parts of the country still under different factions' rule. Wasn't in town long enough to get a second opinion. But what we heard on TV after the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was how the U.S. rescued women from the Taliban fundamentalist terror, even though before the U.S. backed fundamentalist rebellion against the socialist government, many women worked, wore western cloths and attended university, in Kabul at least. Remember front page photo in the New York Times of three bodies face down – caption, "teachers executed for teaching girls" (by the kind of pre-Taliban fundamentalist hill tribes the CIA was backing or about to back in 1979, before the Soviets came in.]
Remember the whole world was portrayed as giving its blessing, or at least acquiescence, to the invasion of Afghanistan for the sole reason of its government refusing to extradite Osama bin Laden upon the demand of the President of the United States of America - even though no treaty of extradition existed between the U.S. and Afghanistan and President Bush refusing to give the Afghan government (our previously supported Taliban), the evidence that might have saved their face in turning him over. One recalls the not so believable plea that Osama was no longer in Afghanistan. (Almost certainly this is the case now, as CIA and Pentagon keep reporting Osama to be in Pakistan.)
Observation: For years now almost nothing is ever heard about killing in order to find that Saudi Osama bin Laden guy. Its the Taliban 'insurgency' that is getting stronger that the anchors tell us that all the fighting is about - in spite of the U.S. and NATO nations air strikes. Note: don't forget that those called insurgents are the former government.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).