-Caveat Lector-

Great article below. Once again from the British media
. Take a look at my nonprofit website. Gavin.
The Cancer Racket Exposed
http://www.cancerinform.freewebsites.com



Robert Fisk: Hypocrisy, hatred and the war on terror
The Independent
http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=103717

'If the US attacks were an assault on "civilisation",
why shouldn't Muslim regard the Afganistan attack as a
war on Islam?'

08 November 2001

"Air campaign"? "Coalition forces"? "War on terror"?
How much longer must we go on enduring these lies?
There is no
"campaign" – merely an air bombardment of the poorest
and most broken country in the world by the world's
richest and
most sophisticated nation. No MiGs have taken to the
skies to do battle with the American B-52s or F-18s.
The only
ammunition soaring into the air over Kabul comes from
Russian anti-aircraft guns manufactured around 1943.

Coalition? Hands up who's seen the Luftwaffe in the
skies over Kandahar, or the Italian air force or the
French air force
over Herat. Or even the Pakistani air force. The
Americans are bombing Afghanistan with a few British
missiles thrown in.
"Coalition" indeed.

Then there's the "war on terror". When are we moving
on to bomb the Jaffna peninsula? Or Chechnya – which
we have
already left in Vladimir Putin's bloody hands? I even
seem to recall a massive terrorist car bomb that
exploded in Beirut in
1985 – targeting Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, the spiritual
inspiration to the Hezbollah, who now appears to be
back on
Washington's hit list – and which missed Nasrallah but
slaughtered 85 innocent Lebanese civilians. Years
later, Carl
Bernstein revealed in his book, Veil, that the CIA was
behind the bomb after the Saudis agreed to fund the
operation. So
will the US President George Bush be hunting down the
CIA murderers involved? The hell he will.

So why on earth are all my chums on CNN and Sky and
the BBC rabbiting on about the "air campaign",
"coalition forces"
and the "war on terror"? Do they think their viewers
believe this twaddle?

Certainly Muslims don't. In fact, you don't have to
spend long in Pakistan to realise that the Pakistani
press gives an
infinitely more truthful and balanced account of the
"war" – publishing work by local intellectuals,
historians and opposition
writers along with Taliban comments and pro-government
statements as well as syndicated Western analyses –
than The
New York Times; and all this, remember, in a military
dictatorship.

You only have to spend a few weeks in the Middle East
and the subcontinent to realise why Tony Blair's
interviews on
al-Jazeera and Larry King Live don't amount to a hill
of beans. The Beirut daily As-Safir ran a
widely-praised editorial
asking why an Arab who wanted to express the anger and
humiliation of millions of other Arabs was forced to
do so from a
cave in a non-Arab country. The implication, of
course, was that this – rather than the crimes against
humanity on 11
September – was the reason for America's determination
to liquidate Osama bin Laden. Far more persuasive has
been a
series of articles in the Pakistani press on the
outrageous treatment of Muslims arrested in the United
States in the aftermath
of the September atrocities.

One such article should suffice. Headlined "Hate crime
victim's diary", in The News of Lahore, it outlined
the suffering of
Hasnain Javed, who was arrested in Alabama on 19
September with an expired visa. In prison in
Mississippi, he was beaten
up by a prisoner who also broke his tooth. Then, long
after he had sounded the warden's alarm bell, more men
beat him
against a wall with the words: "Hey bin Laden, this is
the first round. There are going to be 10 rounds like
this." There are
dozens of other such stories in the Pakistani press
and most of them appear to be true.

Again, Muslims have been outraged by the hypocrisy of
the West's supposed "respect" for Islam. We are not,
so we have
informed the world, going to suspend military
operations in Afghanistan during the holy fasting
month of Ramadan. After
all, the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq conflict continued during
Ramadan. So have Arab-Israeli conflicts. True enough.
But why, then,
did we make such a show of suspending bombing on the
first Friday of the bombardment last month out of our
"respect"
for Islam? Because we were more respectful then than
now? Or because – the Taliban remaining unbroken –
we've decided
to forget about all that "respect"?

"I can see why you want to separate bin Laden from our
religion," a Peshawar journalist said to me a few days
ago. "Of
course you want to tell us that this isn't a religious
war, but Mr Robert, please, please stop telling us how
much you respect
Islam."

There is another disturbing argument I hear in
Pakistan. If, as Mr Bush claims, the attacks on New
York and Washington
were an assault on "civilisation", why shouldn't
Muslims regard an attack on Afghanistan as a war on
Islam?

The Pakistanis swiftly spotted the hypocrisy of the
Australians. While itching to get into the fight
against Mr bin Laden, the
Australians have sent armed troops to force destitute
Afghan refugees out of their territorial waters. The
Aussies want to
bomb Afghanistan – but they don't want to save the
Afghans. Pakistan, it should be added, hosts 2.5
million Afghan
refugees. Needless to say, this discrepancy doesn't
get much of an airing on our satellite channels.
Indeed, I have never
heard so much fury directed at journalists as I have
in Pakistan these past few weeks. Nor am I surprised.

What, after all, are we supposed to make of the
so-called "liberal" American television journalist
Geraldo Rivera who is just
moving to Fox TV, a Murdoch channel? "I'm feeling more
patriotic than at any time in my life, itching for
justice, or
maybe just revenge," he announced this week. "And this
catharsis I've gone through has caused me to reassess
what I do for
a living." This is truly chilling stuff. Here is an
American journalist actually revealing that he's
possibly "itching for
revenge".

Infinitely more shameful – and unethical – were the
disgraceful words of Walter Isaacson, the chairman of
CNN, to his
staff. Showing the misery of Afghanistan ran the risk
of promoting enemy propaganda, he said. "It seems
perverse to focus
too much on the casualties or hardship in Afghanistan
... we must talk about how the Taliban are using
civilian shields and
how the Taliban have harboured the terrorists
responsible for killing close up to 5,000 innocent
people."

Mr Isaacson was an unimaginative boss of Time magazine
but these latest words will do more to damage the
supposed
impartiality of CNN than anything on the air in recent
years. Perverse? Why perverse? Why are Afghan
casualties so far
down Mr Isaacson's compassion? Or is Mr Isaacson just
following the lead set down for him a few days earlier
by the White
House spokesman Ari Fleischer, who portentously
announced to the Washington press corps that in times
like these "people
have to watch what they say and watch what they do".

Needless to say, CNN has caved in to the US
government's demand not to broadcast Mr bin Laden's
words in toto lest they
contain "coded messages". But the coded messages go
out on television every hour. They are "air campaign",
"coalition
forces" and "war on terror".

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find a job, post your resume.
http://careers.yahoo.com

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to