This is my first post in a couple of weeks, which is disgracefully slack (many apologies to anyone who visits daily - and I see there are a couple - and leaves disappointed), but it has been a busy summer.
So back to blogging with a bang, then, or maybe just a quiet pfft depending on whether you are using a silencer. I've been mildly intrigued by all these confidential American military reports that have appeared on WikiLeaks. It seems to have created a bit of an outrage, with the top brass saying that Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks owner with the Warhole hair, has the blood of Afghans on his hands for revealing the names of informers and conspirators.
Not as much Afghan blood on his hands as the misfiring US troops, Assange's defenders may reply, but the White House has a point that there is a certain lack of morality and concern for consequences behind the publication of the leaked documents.
Robert Gibbs, President Obama's press secretary, pleaded with Assange today to stop, but that is hardly likely given that Gibbs, an owlish bumbling fellow, is as much of a threat as a goldfish. So why doesn't the White House just, you know, have Assange whacked?
These leaked documents reveal that there is a special ops assassination squad going round bumping off the Taleban rather than arresting them for trial, which is cool (sorry, I mean disgraceful). Why not put a couple of them on Assange detail?
Surely they know how: pull up in a car alongside him, invite him to go for a ride out to New Jersey or some godforsaken place and then take care of him. Make it look like an accident, of course. Astounding how many people accidentally garotte themselves with cheesewire when buying shoes.
Honestly, if you can't bump off people that are being irritating, what is the point of having a CIA? What is the point, indeed, of being President?
Posts
This is how polls should be reported
3 hours ago
5 comments:
Welcome back, i thought u gone for long vacation without informing your blog readers. Lol.
What 'Wikileaks' done is right thing. They did put some lives on the risk, but end of the day their work is appreciable. US govt need to change its Afghan policy.
Thanks Vipul. So you were the reader... Yes, sorry, I was busy with the Open golf and Wimbledon and just lacking time. Will try to keep blogging if you keep encouraging me.
One of the issues about WikiLeaks is that American justice has failed to protect journalists' anonymous sources and so for some this is the only way of getting information into the public domain.
I am worried that lives have been put at risk by this, though. A couple of months ago I went to see an Afghan refuge in London, where children had been sent to Britain by their parents who feared they would be killed for helping the Americans. One child, who was only about 16, had an uncle who was a Taleban commander and wanted his father to help them fight. His father refused, so the Taleban cut his arm off with a penknife and then hanged him. The mother sent her son out of the country in fear that they would do the same to him.
Whatever you think of US policy in Afghanistan, many people feel (myself included) that getting rid of the Taleban and allowing the Afghans to live without such terror is a good thing
Would be great if after a suspicious death, (maybe involving rhubarb?) Barack just rolled out the "You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment," line, then raised an eyebrow. What's the point of being the boss if you can't have a little fun.
I am not against the NATO presence in Afghanistan and also i believes that Getting rid of the Taliban & allowing the Afghans to live without such terror is a good thing. But NATO & especially US should change their policy towards afghan peoples. They should avoid afghan civilians deaths at any cost during raids against terrorists.
Ys, agreed, Vipul. Greater care for civilian lives should be taken. The US should treat Afghan lives with more respect than the Taleban do
Post a Comment