open Democracy News Analysis - democratic society - Comments

Asias on "The resurgence of the neo-Taliban"

Asias — Wed, 27 May 2009 12:32:55 +0100

What a strange creature human being is, ah!? I just felt alone, both spiritually and physically, sunk in deep thought, and looked enquiringly into people and myself for some kind of answer to the question I had not formulated in my mind. No, no, I was not confused at all as you may have possibly been thinking now. Neither was I going crazy! I thought I just didn’t have the slightest idea or motive what to do next and how to go about it. “How to go about what?” I didn’t know myself. This was the question I had asked myself then. Maybe to go about this weird situation that I felt screamingly lonely. I switched my computer on and put some music, the best ones I usually listen when I need some relax, and, and suddenly to my own surprise I found myself clapping insanely, feeling like shouting and crying as loud as I could. “OH, WHAT IS GOING ON, SHIT?” I shouted. I realized that I didn’t shout. It was not a scream. It was just my inner sound. But I thought I did shout. Then in a low voice I whispered slowly to myself “what is indeed going on with me?” Hhmm! Ey! [breathing] Hey, come down! Everything is good! ♪Perhaps I was addicted to the dark side
Somewhere inside my childhood I missed my heart die
And even though we both came from the same places
The money and the fame made us all change places

blindfreddie on "The resurgence of the neo-Taliban"

blindfreddie — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:21:40 +0000

"for a person who believe in the only God",

which god do you mean?most people only believe in the god named MONEY.

"the future life is more important than the life of this world"

there is no future life,there is no heaven,no hell,there is only tomorrow,if you not here tomorrow then you are dead.

so he must always try to please god and rely on God for his survival.

go into an empty room lock the door and pray to your god or any of the million so called gods,stay there untill you realise that if you don't help yourself you will die in that room.

"As for the things that the west has invented and done for civilazation i'll just remind you that the only God is the creator of the universe,of the earth,of mankind and of all that existes even the air you breathe.whoever believes does this for his own good because GOD doesnt need nobody,we need Him."

people have invented everything in this world from east to west,north to south and will continue to do so,from different races,different nations.i'll just remind you that YOU need to believe because you are afraid of dying.do not say "WE" because you only speak for yourself."Religion is opium of the masses".without religion most of the problems of the world would disapear.throw the crutches of religion away and be free.

varices on "The resurgence of the neo-Taliban"

varices — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:57:53 +0100

The “War on Drugs” has been waged for many years, at huge cost in money, lives and suffering, and there is little or no evidence that the drug traffickers are losing. The Government should also be reminded that the drug trade is one of the main sources of revenue for terrorists. The Government no longer uses the phrase “War on Terror”, but there is still a power struggle to be won, and cutting the source of revenue for terrorists is surely an option worth considering. A change of policy from prohibition to legitimisation and humanitarian application would surely be seen as a statesmanlike choice. We should be pressing for this solution.

felid on "The resurgence of the neo-Taliban"

felid — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 18:43:57 +0100

for a person who believe in the only God,the future life is more important than the life of this world so he must always try to please god and rely on God for his survival.As for the things that the west has invented and done for civilazation i'll just remind you that the only God is the creator of the universe,of the earth,of mankind and of all that existes even the air you breathe.whoever believes does this for his own good because GOD doesnt need nobody,we need Him.

__________________
Submited by : Caballos

Ilyas khan Baloch on "Pakistan: farewell to democracy"

Ilyas khan Baloch — Tue, 13 May 2008 21:55:31 +0100

Sir/Madam, Democracy as a system of governance and interest representation demands respect for dissent and opposition. It recognizes the principle of majority rule and guarantees protection of minorities. Democracy also builds faith in electoral contesta

dominikwach on "Hamas: talk to them"

dominikwach — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:36:26 +0100

This article is a very good and comprehensive analysis. It contains most important elements and arguments which are unfortunately missed (on purpose or accidentally) by most authors. It's good that some people can look at Hamas objectively, not only as a terrorist organisation. If Israel wants peace, it must deal with Hamas, but in my opinion Israel is not interested in final settlement with Palestinians now, and in the nearest future.

john problem on "Hamas: talk to them"

john problem — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:38:12 +0100

Britain had a long haul with Northern Ireland. It was only when the leaders of the two Northern Irish factions realised that they were getting old and might never enjoy the delights of internationally accepted power that they decided to get together - and peace prevailed. Perhaps the same applies to Hamas and Fatah. If so, we'd better get a move on helping them to get there. This article is to be applauded - there is never any rationale for not talking. Better to have them in the tent than outside kicking the guy rope.

jim willmot on "Secularism confronts Islam"

jim willmot — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:41:37 +0000

Of course, Christianity isn't much better. Check out evilbible.com. While the war in Afganistan is a total mess (the West armed everyone in the region), I feel for the women who must wear burkas, submit to the sexual desires of older, bigoted men, and are not allowed to be educated. Where is the outrage in the Muslim community for this type of behavior? Magical thinking is silly people...treat people as you would want to be treated...it is as simple as that...no need for priests, mullahs, right reverends, etc. The religion industries of the world must be exposed for the fraud that it is. It is the perfect scam...they have never had to deliver on their promises. I just hope Muslims can find new ways to escape the veil (as many Christians have)...without feeling they are losing their culture/identity and more importantly, without losing their lives.

irine52 on "Secularism confronts Islam"

irine52 — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:30:48 +0000

Religion and religious customs cannot be used to govern a country. In every country there must be a law separating church and state. Religion in general is too controversial, 'religious truths' are too questionable because they cannot be proven.
Religion, any religion, is to be practised in private. Religion cannot be part of public life and government.
The first country to separate church (religion) and state was Mongolia/China about 1500 years ago. While Europe and the Arab countries have a long history of wars in the name of religion, killing in the name of 'God' (what/whose God), Mongolia/China has had no religious wars, actually, Buddhism appears to be the most peaceful religion, seeking only harmony and tolerance.

basilsmith on "Deaths in Iraq: the numbers game, revisited"

basilsmith — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:40:14 +0000

I take your point Paul Carline. This has been a cause for real concern for many years in Australia. Is there any country which is not cursed with the damage caused by ignoring the people, and their right to rule - snatched away from them by power-hungry self-righteous party politicians?
The results in Iraq are truly shocking, but it is also happening all over the world, and the UN is stymied by the the security council's (including the USA's) failure to support it.
Wherever you look democracy is a joke.
Readers may be interested to check out website http://ballotsinparliament.org.
Basil Smith

tezcatlipoca on "Deaths in Iraq: the numbers game, revisited"

tezcatlipoca — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:52:57 +0000

The aggressors have no time for a Reconciliation Process, neither restorative justice that exposes the truth and lies of the Bushocracy nor retributive justice that would actually hold someone accountable. Bush et al are too 'morally sound' to allow this to happen. They should be impeached and charged with war crimes, but we all know that this will never happen.

Whether or not 9/11 was fabricated (which I believe it was), the 'suspects' were mostly from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. And now America is selling a massive amount of weapons to Saudi Arabia. This does not make any sense.

This war, which has cost too many lives, regardless of which numbers are believed, is not about democracy and freedom, but OIL.

Iran, by far the most democratic nation in the region, is next.

pete daine on "Deaths in Iraq: the numbers game, revisited"

pete daine — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:44:22 +0000

you write: "The authors of the study published in the Lancet are now arguing that many deaths may have been kept unreported, by implication questioning the independence of a survey conducted with Iraqi national authorities; this would suggest that the international community itself, the World Health Organisation and other participating funding agencies would have trumped scientific excellence to abide by a political agenda".

This is unfair. The Lancet authors are _not_ suggesting anything about the WHO. What they said was this:

"The last time this group (COSIT) did a mortality survey like this they also found a very low crude death rate and when they revisited the exact same homes a second time and just asked about child deaths, they recorded almost twice as many. Thus, the past record suggests people do not want to report deaths to these government employees."
http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/2008/01/10/les-roberts-on-new-iraq-mortality-study/

So the use of government employees itself may be a problem, they say. What they _don't_ say or suggest (by implication or not) is that the WHO "would have trumped scientific excellence to abide by a political agenda", as you claim.

You write: "There remain three numbers: one too small, one too high, one somewhere in the middle."
There's no doubt that the IBC figures are "too" low. But there's no such certainty for the Lancet figures, though you state that they are "too" high. How do you know?

paul.carline on "Deaths in Iraq: the numbers game, revisited"

paul.carline — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:43:01 +0000

Michel Thieren recommends that the warmongers "begin politics and stop the killing". But Clausewitz was right in stating that "war is politics by other means". The wars on and in Afghanistan and Iraq are pre-eminently wars planned, contrived and instigated for political ends - the control of key strategic areas of the planet, together with their resources.

People who have retained their humanity and moral sense will agree that a single death resulting from an immoral and illegal war is a death too many. To that extent the numbers game may be irrelevant (though not, I suspect, if the figure of deaths caused both directly and indirectly were considerably higher - in the millions, as suggested by Gideon Polya).

Surely the problem with MIchel Thieren's recommendation is that there is no mechanism for forcing the aggressors to stop killing and "begin politics". Moreover, what kind of political process does he imagine: a Truth and Reconciliation process? The aggressors are scarcely interested in submitting to a process which would expose the lies and the mass murder (on 9/11) which provided the pretext for war (subsequently reinforced by other bogus 'terrorist' events around the world).

The reality is that most 'democracies' - and especially the US and the UK - are, and have long been, pseudo-democracies in which there are no effective controls on executive action. What is relatively new (we could take Hitler's burning of the Reichstag in 1933 as a starting-point) is the now routine use of state-sponsored terror to create the fiction of an external enemy and to maintain a high level of fear in the domestic population which will then accept both external wars (against the fake enemy) and domestic restriction of civil liberties. The mainstream media play a vital role in the creation and maintenance of the necessary myths - such as 'al-Qaeda' and the 'war on terror'.

If there is a political solution at all, it can come only after the lies have been exposed and the system which manufactures and publicises the lies has been radically reformed. We do need real democracies with constitutional powers to control both the executives and Eisenhower's 'military-industrial complex'. But the political process has been hijacked to such an extent by those forces that it is difficult to see how we can move from the present intolerable situation to something approaching genuine democracy. In the meantime it is vital that the lies which sustain the present structures and politics be scotched.

opendemocracy on "Benazir murdered: what next? "

opendemocracy — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 10:29:13 +0000

I do recommend everyone to listen to the Lieven lecture that Kanishk points to. What struck me is the story of the dominance of the army as an institution - the only institution? - that covers all--or most-- parts of Pakistani society. No one is saying that popular unrest will lead to chaos--just to the re-establishment of emergency rule. This "stabiltiy" comes from the dominance of the army's position. The blame game: who is behind the killing? will new attacks be revenge attacks or new attempts at destabilisation? remind me of the dark period of Algeria's recent history, when another military establishment became embroiled---at what level no one knows---in a mix of revenge killing and anti-Islamic "political stabilisation". Can Pakistan avoid such a period? Does what the US (and Europe) do now have an impact on this likelihood? Tony

richard on "The resurgence of the neo-Taliban"

richard — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 20:36:34 +0000

British troops in Afghanistan are being killed and injured in a useless attempt to stop farmers there from growing opium. In effect, we are asking the farmers to starve, or at least to plunge themselves and their families into deep poverty, by refraining from planting opium. The chances of success are not high, and the leaders of the army there are giving signals that confirm this. At the same time, the incidence of cancer in Africa is rising according to a recent report in the BMJ, and people there are dying of cancer without having access to morphine or heroin. Two problems, one solution: instead of burning the Afghan opium crops, we could purchase it from the farmers, process it, and make it available in Africa. A think tank, the Senlis Council, http://www.senliscouncil.net/modules/Opium licensing are proposing poppy licensing. This will decriminalise poppy growing, and allow UN agencies to buy up the whole crop and turn it into medicine. I have asked the Ministry of Defence why they will not consider this as an option. The Government is concerned about diversion of the purchased opium from government agencies to the black market. This is seen as a meaningful objection by NuLabour ministers, despite the fact that at the moment 100% of the trafficked crop finds its way onto the black market. Government complains that the Afghan Government does not have the necessary resources, institutional capacity and control mechanisms in place to ensure that they are the sole purchaser of opiate raw materials. This begs the question of what tiny fraction of the cost of military action would be needed. They are spending £270 million over three years in support of the Afghan government’s National Drug Control Strategy (NDCS). The “War on Drugs” has been waged for many years, at huge cost in money, lives and suffering, and there is little or no evidence that the drug traffickers are losing. The Government should also be reminded that the drug trade is one of the main sources of revenue for terrorists. The Government no longer uses the phrase “War on Terror”, but there is still a power struggle to be won, and cutting the source of revenue for terrorists is surely an option worth considering. A change of policy from prohibition to legitimisation and humanitarian application would surely be seen as a statesmanlike choice. We should be pressing for this solution.