UA-9726592-1
Showing posts with label Taliban. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taliban. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Sunday, June 5, 2011

The drug war that failed




The UN has declared the drug war has failed. It was started 40 years ago by Richard Nixon and the US has invested more than a trillion dollars in the failed war.


In the video, Cenk Uygur (Host of The Young Turks and MSNBC contributor) says the War on Drugs is already lost. Rightardia agrees. 


Legalize pot to reduce the strain on the police and to help the economy. The cigarette industry has already trade marked most of the cool pot names and marijuana cigarettes could be on the streets within months of legalization. 


The government should put a hefty tax on marijuana products and regulate the production and agricultural aspects of this trade. This should provide a healthy revenue stream for the government. 


The police should conctrate more on the hard drugs like heroin and prescription abuse. 


We have a heroin problem in this country because of the Afghan war. 


In Afghanistan itself,  by 1995 an extremist strain of Sunni Islam called the Taliban---heavily funded and advised by the ISI (Pakistani intelligence) and the CIA and with the support of Islamic political parties in Pakistan---fought its way to power, taking over most of the country, luring many tribal chiefs into its fold with threats and bribes.

The Taliban promised to end the factional fighting and banditry that was the mujahideen trademark . . .



The Taliban unleashed a religious reign of terror, imposing an even stricter interpretation of Muslim law than used by most of the Kabul clergy . . .Women who were deemed “immoral” were stoned to death or buried alive.

None of this was of much concern to leaders in Washington who got along famously with the Taliban. As recently as 1999, the US government was paying the entire annual salary of every single Taliban government official (SF Chronicle, 10/2/2001). 


Friday, February 4, 2011

Remember the good ol' days when the Taliban was on our side?

Yes, we created the Taliban, but they were originally called the Mujaheadeen when we provided them with weapons to fight the forces of the Soviet Union.

Then GW Bush decided to invade Afghanistan because the Taliban woudn't hand over the Al Qaeda in the country. So we bankrolled another Afghan group we called the "Northern Alliance."

The Northern Alliance were the drug lords that the Taliban had driven from the country. We now have record shipments of heroin to the US and the Taliban  is using those narco-dollars to buy weapons to fight our forces with.

Yes, it was better when we were paying the Taliban $50 million each year to keep the poppy crop under control. Now we ware fighting the Taliban and spending $2 billion each week, but our forces leave the poppy crop alone. We don't want to offend the Afghan farmers or the "Northern Alliance drug lords.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/UFPYA 

Netcraft rank: 6699 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Friday, July 16, 2010

DBKP – Death By 1000 Papercuts exclusive on Taliban monkies



July 16, 2010
By RidesAPaleHorse
notes: Mondo
images: RAPH   
Is the Taliban training a cadre of armed terrorist monkeys to do battle with NATO forces? DBKP has the EXCLUSIVE pix which may blow the cover off this explosive story!


NOTE: Blogger Jeff Schogol, who calls himself “The Rumor Doctor” investigated the monkey terrorist claims.

NATO spokesman Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale told Schogol, “We have absolutely nothing that leads us to believe that this tale could be even remotely based in reality.”

Which made us wonder if the Rumor Doctor or NATO had seen any of our exclusive pix before making their obviously hasty statements?


Is this a case of truth being stranger than fiction?

Or a case of satire being stranger than truth?

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 15549
http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Thursday, July 15, 2010

TOP SECRET video shows Taliban training monkeys to kill US troops



Taiwanese CGI Reports (VIDEO) First Posted: 07-15-10 03:48 PM | Updated: 07-15-10 04:03 PM

This video was copied from a Taliban server by hacker Dark Dante. If anyone on Usenet can translate Chinese, please provide a transcript of this video that was hacked from the Taliban server.

Is the Taliban training monkeys to attack US soldiers in Afghanistan?

That is no exaggeration.

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed:
feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 15549 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Huff Po: Ambassodor Karl Eikenberry Dissents On Afghan Troop Increase

Huffington Post | Nick Sabloff First Posted: 11-11-09 06:33 PM | Updated: 11-11-09 07:38 PM
Ahead of today's meeting of Obama's national security team to discuss Afghan war strategy, Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan and a member of the war council, sent a pair of classified cables to Washington expressing deep reservations about the possibility of sending more U.S. troops to the country.

Eikenberry's concerns about the deployment of more troops centered around Afghan President Hamid Karzai's unwillingness to clamp down on rampant corruption throughout the country, a situation that has helped the Taliban re-establish itself there, the Post states.
Eikenberry's memos were skeptical of plans to send more troops until Karzai's government steps up its efforts to root out corruption.

But Karzai''s corruption is not the only thing keeping the Taliban in business, according to an explosive new story by reporter Aram Roston for The Nation.
The Nation alleges that hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military funds are making their way to Afghan insurgents, including the Taliban. Roston reports that the U.S. is paying off insurgents to persuade them from attacking U.S. supply lines.



This is interestting because the US was paying the Taliban $50 million to keep the poppy crop under control. Now we are paying millions more to the Taliban in protection money to secure the US supply lines. In addition, the Russians have offered to fly supplies into Afghanistan that would save the US money if we started using this option.

In this grotesque carnival, the US military's contractors are forced to pay suspected insurgents to protect American supply routes. It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting.
This is a deadly irony, because these funds add up to a huge amount of money for the Taliban. "It's a big part of their income," one of the top Afghan government security officials told The Nation in an interview. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10 percent of the Pentagon's logistics contracts--hundreds of millions of dollars--consists of payments to insurgents.

Read more from the Nation: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091130/roston

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 5559 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com
Powered by ScribeFire.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Taliban displays the spoils of a military action



Al Jazeera has obtained exclusive footage showing the Taliban in Afghanistan displaying what appears to be US weapons.

The fighters say they seized the arms cache from two US outposts in eastern Nuristan province.

Days after the alleged assault, the US military pulled out its troops from the area.
Al Jazerera's Jonah Hull reports.

source: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/11/200911103328650297.html

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 5953 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com

Sunday, August 9, 2009

AN POLL: US 'biggest' threat say Pakistanis

By Owen Fay

About 43 per cent of Pakistanis support dialogue with the Taliban, the survey said [AFP]

A survey commissioned by Al Jazeera in Pakistan has revealed a widespread disenchantment with the United States for interfering with what most people consider internal Pakistani affairs.

The polling was conducted by Gallup Pakistan - a separate organisation affiliated with the US-based Gallup Inc - and more than 2,600 people took part.

Interviews were conducted across the political spectrum in all four of the country's provinces, and represented men and women of every economic and ethnic background.

When respondents were asked what they consider to be the biggest threat to the nation of Pakistan, 11 per cent of the population identified the Taliban fighters, who have been blamed for scores of deadly bomb attacks across the country in recent years.

Another 18 per cent said that they believe that the greatest threat came from neighbouring India, which has fought three wars with Pakistan since partition in 1947.

But an overwhelming number, 59 per cent of respondents, said the greatest threat to Pakistan right now is, in fact, the US, a donor of considerable amounts of military and development aid.

Tackling the Taliban

The resentment was made clearer when residents were asked about the Pakistan's military efforts to tackle the Taliban.

Keeping with recent trends a growing number of people, now 41 per cent, supported the campaign.

About 24 per cent of people remained opposed, while another 22 per cent of Pakistanis remained neutral on the question.

A recent offensive against Taliban fighters in the Swat, Lower Dir and Buner districts of North West Frontier Province killed at least 1,400 fighters, according to the military, but also devastated the area and forced two million to leave their homes.

The military has declared the operation a success, however, some analysts have suggested that many Taliban fighters simply slipped away to other areas, surviving to fight another day.

When people were asked if they would support government-sanctioned dialogue with Taliban fighters if it were a viable option the numbers change significantly.

Although the same 41 per cent said they would still support the military offensive, the number of those supporting dialogue leaps up to 43 per cent.

So clearly, Pakistanis are, right now, fairly evenly split on how to deal with the Taliban threat.

Drone anger

However, when asked if they support or oppose the US military's drone attacks against what Washington claims are Taliban and al-Qaeda targets, only nine per cent of respondents reacted favourably.

A massive 67 per cent say they oppose US military operations on Pakistani soil.

Forty-one per cent of Pakistanis say they support the offensive against the Taliban

"This is a fact that the hatred against the US is growing very quickly, mainly because of these drone attacks," Makhdoom Babar, the editor-in-chief of Pakistan's The Daily Mail newspaper, said.

"Maybe the intelligence channels, the military channels consider it productive, but for the general public it is controversial ... the drone attacks are causing collateral damage," he told Al Jazeera.

Nearly 500 people, mostly suspected Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters, are believed to have been killed in about 50 US drone attacks since August last year, according to intelligence agents, local government officials and witnesses.

Washington refuses to confirm the raids, but the US military in neighbouring Afghanistan and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are the only forces operating in the area that are known to have the technology.

The government in Islamabad formally opposes the attacks saying that they violate Pakistani sovereignty and cause civilian casualties which turn public opinion against efforts to battle the Taliban.

The consensus of opinion in opposition to US military involvement in Pakistan is notable given the fact that on a raft of internal issues there is a clear level of disagreement, something which would be expected in a country of this size.

Pakistani leadership

When asked for their opinions on Asif Ali Zardari, the Pakistani president, 42 per cent of respondents said they believed he was doing a bad job. Around 11 per cent approved of his leadership, and another 34 per cent had no strong opinion either way.

That pattern was reflected in a question about Zardari's Pakistan People's Party (PPP).

Respondents were asked if they thought the PPP was good or bad for the country.

About 38 per cent said the PPP was bad for the country, 20 per cent believed it was good for the country and another 30 per cent said they had no strong opinion.

Respondents were even more fractured when asked for their views on how the country should be led.

By far, the largest percentage would opt for Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister and leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) party, as leader. At least 38 per cent backed him to run Pakistan.

Last month, the Pakistani supreme court quashed Sharif's conviction on charges of hijacking, opening the way for him to run for political office again.

Zardari 'unpopular'

Zardari, the widower of assassinated former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, received only nine per cent support, while Reza Gilani, Pakistan's prime minister, had the backing of 13 per cent.

The survey suggests Sharif is Pakistan's most popular politician by some distance.

But from there, opinions vary greatly. Eight per cent of the population would support a military government, 11 per cent back a political coalition of the PPP and the PML-N party.

Another six per cent throw their support behind religious parties and the remaining 15 per cent would either back smaller groups or simply do not have an opinion.

Babar told Al Jazeera that Zardari's unpopularity was understandable given the challenges that the country had faced since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US.

"Any president in Pakistan would be having the same popularity that President Zardari is having, because under this situation the president of Pakistan has to take a lot of unpopular decisions," he said.

"He is in no position to not take unpopular decisions that are actually in the wider interests of the country, but for common people these are very unpopular decisions."

For the complete poll results, click here: http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/08/2009888238994769.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/08/20098910857878664.html

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1

Netcraft rank: 19798 http://toolbar.netcraft.com/stats/topsites?s=BE281D838226A4DAC11D0E201A0E#19798

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

UK support for Afghan War wanes

Most Britons believe the war in Afghanistan is "unwinnable" and want troops pulled out, according to a newspaper opinion poll.

Fifty-eight per cent see the offensive against the Taliban as a lost cause, while 52 per cent want the troops withdrawn from Afghanistan, the poll commissioned by the Independent indicated.

The ComRes telephone poll of 1,008 Britons, which was conducted between July 24 and 26, came as the bodies of four British soldiers were flown home to a UK airbase on Tuesday.

The troops were among 22 UK soldiers killed in Afghanistan this month, bringing the total number of service personnel to have died in the conflict since 2001 to 191.

Lacking equipment

About 75 per cent believe British troops lack the equipment they need to perform their role in Afghanistan safely, compared to 16 per cent who think they have adequate resources, the poll said.

However, 60 per cent of those polled do not think more troops and resources should be sent to the front line.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/07/2009728181223572146.html

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1

Netcraft rank: 24118

Monday, July 27, 2009

Taliban issues new code of conduct


The Taliban in Afghanistan has issued a book laying down a code of conduct for its fighters.

Al Jazeera has obtained a copy of the book which further indicates that Mullah Omar, the movement's leader, wants to centralise its operations.

The book, with 13 chapters and 67 articles, lays out what one of the most secretive organisations in the world today, can and cannot do.


It talks of limiting suicide attacks, avoiding civilian casualties and winning the battle for the hearts and minds of the local civilian population.

James Bays, our correspondent in Afghanistan, said every fighter is being issued the pocket book entitled "The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Rules for Mujahideen".

Our correspondent said the book sheds considerable light on the structure, organisation and aims of the group.

 
In the book, Mullah Omar is quoted as saying that creating a new mujahideen group or battalion is forbidden.

"If unofficial groups or irregular battalions refuse to join the formal structure, they should be disbanded," says Omar.

So far, individual Taliban commanders have had a fair degree of autonomy, often deciding what operations to conduct and how to run the territory that they control.

Our correspondent said the regulations seem to be an attempt by Mullah Omar to bring all of the Taliban under his control.
"We have in the past had a lot of different groups in Afghanistan operating under the umbrella of the Taliban," Bays said.

"But it says in these regulations that if you find an irregular battalion that is not obeying orders then what you have to do is find that battalion and then disarm them."

Suicide bombing rules

 While the Taliban have repeatedly used suicide bombings across Afghanistan, the book now says that they should be used only on high and important targets.
"A brave son of Islam should not be used for lower and useless targets. The utmost effort should be made to avoid civilian casualties," the book says.

There are now clear guidelines on how the Taliban will treat its prisoners as well.

"Whenever any official, soldier, contractor or worker of the slave government is captured, these prisoners cannot be attacked or harmed," it says.

"The decision on whether to seek a prisoner exchange or to release the prisoner with strong guarantees will be made by the provincial leader.

"Releasing prisoners in exchange for money is strictly prohibited."

The book further states that if a "military infidel" is captured, the decision on whether to kill, release or exchange the hostage is only to be made by the Imam, a reference to Mullah Omar, or deputy Imam.

Winning hearts

The book makes it clear that it is the duty of every fighter to win over the local population.

"The mujahideen have to behave well and show proper treatment to the nation, in order to bring the hearts of civilian Muslims closer to them.

"The mujahideen must avoid discrimination based on tribal roots, language or geographic background."

 
Our correspondent said the reference to winning over the hearts of the Afghan people is very similar to language used by Nato-led military forces in the country.

"Recently the Nato commander here issued a new tactical directive saying that civilians should not be bombed - almost the same words in these regulations to Taliban fighters," Bays said.

"Both sides [are] trying to win over the civilian population in their area."

The release of the rule book comes less than a month before Afghans head to the polls for a presidential election, which the Taliban has deemed an illegitimate system imposed by foreigners.

The timing may be just a coincidence, however, as rival presidential candidates detail their manifestos and the Taliban makes an effort to win over the Afghan public.

source: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/07/20097278348124813.html

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1

Netcraft rank: 30670

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Taliban Video of captured US soldier

The Taliban seem to be following the Geneva Conventions. This is why the US should adhere to international law during hostilities.



Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955


Contact Rightardia: eelder1@gmail.com


Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu


Improve blog traffic with TrafficG http://trafficg.com/splash/splash01.php?uid=eelder1


Netcraft rank: 44637

Monday, June 29, 2009

US establishes new Afghan opium strategy

The United States intends to thoroughly overhaul its anti-drug strategy in Afghanistan, phasing out its opium poppy eradication programme, the US envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan has said.

Richard Holbrooke said on Saturday that poppy eradication - for years a cornerstone of US and UN drug trafficking efforts in the country - is not working and is only driving Afghan farmers into the hands of the Taliban.

Holbrooke said the policy would not target Afghan farmers, but the Taliban who buy their crops [AFP].

"Eradication is a waste of money," Holbrooke said on the sidelines of a G8 foreign ministers' meeting on Afghanistan in Italy, during which he briefed regional representatives on the new policy.

"It might destroy some acreage, but it didn't reduce the amount of money the Taliban got by one dollar. It just helped the Taliban. So we're going to phase out eradication," he said.

Eradication efforts were seen as inefficient because too little was being destroyed at too high a cost, Antonio Maria Costa, the UN drug chief, said.

The old policy was unpopular among powerless small-scale farmers, who often were targeted in the eradication efforts.

Highs and lows

Afghanistan is the world's leading source of opium, cultivating 93 per cent of the world's heroin-producing crop.

While opium cultivation fell 19 per cent last year, it remains concentrated in Afghanistan's southern provinces where the Taliban earned an estimated $50 million to $70 million, according to the UN drug office.

US to overhaul Afghan opium poppy strategy

The new policy calls for assisting farmers who abandon poppy cultivation.

Holbrooke said the international community was not trying to target Afghan farmers, just the Taliban who buy their crops.

"The farmers are not our enemy, they're just growing a crop to make a living," he said.

"It's the drug system. So the US policy was driving people into the hands of the Taliban."

Holbrooke said that Washington is increasing its funding for agricultural assistance from tens of millions of dollars a year to hundreds of millions of dollars.

"We're essentially phasing out our support for crop eradication and using the money to work on interdiction, rule of law, alternative crops," he said.

Afghan reaction

Reacting to the US announcement, a senior Afghan official said that his government agrees with Holbrooke's assessment .

"We are happy with the [new] policy," Mohammad Zafar, the Afghan deputy minister of drugs and anti-narcotics, told Al Jazeera on Sunday.

"Once the farmers get more support then they will leave cultivation of drugs in their fields, because they will have another type of alternative livelihood.

"If we control the drug trafficking, the drug trade, then the price of the opium will be reduced and nobody will go back to cultivating drugs.

"At the same time, if we provide support to the farmer, it will reduce the drug problem in Afghanistan."

Crackdown urged

The new US policy also calls for coordinating a crackdown on drug trafficking across Afghanistan's border before the heroin reaches addicts in Europe, Russia and Iran.

In recent months, US and NATO troops in Afghanistan have begun attacking drug labs and opium storage sites in an effort to deprive the Taliban of drug profits.

According to a UN report this week, opium eradication reached a high in 2003, after the Taliban were removed from power, with over 21,000 hectares destroyed.

In 2008, only 5,480 hectares were cut down, compared with 19,047 hectares in 2007.

The UN's Costa said Afghan opium would kill 100,000 people this year in the parts of world where demand for heroin is highest - Europe, Russia and West Asia.

To fight it, he said, major powers have to expand their counter-drug efforts to neighbouring Pakistan as well as Iran, where half the 7,000 tonnes of exported Afghan opium transits, "causing the highest addiction rate in the world".

"Facing a grave health epidemic, Iran should be given the chance to engage in common efforts to combat illicit trafficking," Costa said.

Iran had been invited to attend the G8 meeting in Italy because anti-drug efforts in Afghanistan have been identified as a vital area where the US and Iran can work together.

But Rome withdrew the invitation when Tehran failed to respond and after its severe crackdown on demonstrators protesting against the country's election result, which has sparked international condemnation.

Key Afghan opium figures


In 2007 193,000 hectares of opium was cultivated. In 2008 the number has dropped by 19 per cent to 157,000 hectares.

But opium production declined by only 6 per cent to 7,700 tonnes from 2007 to 2008.

Since 2007, the number of opium-free provinces has increased by almost 50 per cent, from 13 to 18.

98 per cent of all opium is grown in just seven provinces in the south-west where there are permanent Taliban settlements.

In Helmand province, in the south, 103,000 hectares of opium were cultivated in 2008 year – two thirds of all opium in Afghanistan.

In 2007, 19,047 hectares of opium was eradicated. In 2008 only 5,480 hectares were eradicated.


Sources: UN Office on Drugs and Crime

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2009/06/200962815525664398.html

Get 30 days of free traffic analysis simply by going to Web-Stat: http://www.web-stat.com/?id=2955

Contact Rightardia: eelder1@gmail.com

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/blogspot/Onjs